Geek Vs Casual Fan: Trading KG

By Gudy and Jeff Kamp

Welcome to a new feature of Pluckytown known as "The Geek Versus the Casual Fan." The point is to take someone with (hopefully) deep knowledge about a subject and have the debate go back and forth with someone who's more of a casual observer of the topic at hand.

Today's topic will be the debate about whether to trade Kevin Garnett away from the Timberwolves or to keep him for the upcoming season. With that topic in mind, here we go.

Round 1. *Ding!*

Geek: One of the biggest things to keep in mind when discussing a trade of Garnett is the fact that he's been increasingly frustrated with the organization and their continued incompetence when it comes to putting a team around KG. He wants to win. He knows he's getting towards the end of his career. He's averaged over 38 minutes per game over an 11-1/2 (because of the strike-shortened year) season career. That's a lot of wear and tear on his body. Especially when you consider how intensely he plays the game.

CF: That's the beauty of keeping him, though. I really appreciate his intensity and his unselfishness. I realize that he's probably the only tradeable asset on the Timberwolves, but he's also the only asset worth watching.

G: He's the only asset worth watching right now. This team is going nowhere with the roster as it is. They have a very nice start to the off-season by trading James for Howard, but they need to continue to wipe the slate clean as far as bad contracts go. As much as I love KG, his contract has really been the cornerstone of this franchise's being hamstrung. A trade would, hopefully, bring back a young player, an expiring contract or two to help alleviate the cap issues, and at least one draft pick, hopefully lottery. Those are the building blocks of a watchable team.

CF: Garnett is by no means over the hill. So why can't he be a part of the rebuilding project? Randy Foye, Rashad McCants, Craig Smith, and the 7th pick would do well to have a savvy veteran around to teach them the ropes. That's five players right there to mesh together in order to win some games. We have some pieces perhaps some team would be willing to add, namely Ricky Davis, and perhaps adding one or two more veterans along-side Juwan Howard to help out would be the start of a decent team.

G: I honestly think that, at this point in his career, Ricky Davis is considered by most to be really damaged goods. He's had six teams in nine years and has garnered a reputation of being a bit of a head case and a guy who only gives full effort some of the time. I'm really concerned that McCants is starting to lean towards being a bust, along with the fact that he and Foye are essentially the same player from the standpoint of being a combo guard that relies on quickness and doesn't have the greatest defense. The problem for McCants is that Foye is turning out to be the better player. I completely agree about having a savvy veteran around for the younger players. That's why it's great to have Howard in the fold. He can be a calming influence on these young men and put an arm around them when they screw up, whereas Garnett is more likely to stare holes through their heads with his sheer intensity - a trait (the intensity) that I admire in Garnett and that works great on a veteran team, which the Timberwolves aren't and can't be because of the cap purgatory they're in.

CF: Davis may be "damaged goods" and he may have a reputation, but he does one thing in this league well, and that's score points in bunches. There will always be someone to pay him for that. Moving him, and perhaps one of the other stiffs, would be more beneficial than keeping him, shipping Garnett, and having even more youthful inexperience for Juwan to babysit. I'm sure Howard is at a point in his career where he's fine being somewhat of a team leader, but I'm not sure he wants to be the go-to-guru that he'd have to be as the old man on a young team.

G: The problem is that we have no idea what the Wolves would be able to get for Davis. Most likely, it'd be some other team's baggage/bad contract that doesn't help what the Wolves' main problem remains: age and salary cap. We know what we'd get back for KG based on the proposed deal from the Celtics, to which they agreed in principle: a young, rising post player (Jefferson); an expiring deal (Ratliff/Szczerbiak); getting rid of more baggage (Hudson); and a very high draft pick (5th overall), which could very easily turn into the player that I covet most for the Wolves in Corey Brewer. That fills many of the needs of this team in one deal. Granted, the only one who would give the Wolves, currently with one of the worst GMs in the league in McHale, such a deal is one of the other worst GMs in the league in Danny Ainge. Of course, we can only dream about that deal now, since Garnett's agent stamped down that possibility.

CF: Well, the question we need to be asking is: Is Garnett/Brewer/Whoever we'd get for the baggage better than Brewer/#7/Jefferson/expiring contracts? If the answer is yes, we shouldn't trade Garnett, because there is the definite possibility of Brewer falling to us at #7, and we wouldn't have to move KG.

G: The likelihood of Brewer falling to 7 is pretty low. Our own mock draft, as "homerish" as we can be, didn't have Brewer falling to the Wolves. It's much more likely that he goes 5 or 6. If the trade was able to be made, we'd be looking at a starting lineup of Foye/Brewer/Hassell (or maybe Jarik)/Jefferson/Blunt. That's not even mentioning the #7 pick, which could very well be Spencer Hawes to man the middle or Jeff Green to take the small forward position away from Hassell/Jarik. That's a very nice and athletic young team that might take a year or two to start to come into their own, but by that time, the Wolves will be out from the cap troubles and able to sign a mid- to high-tier free agent. That, to me, is much better than a team with horrible cap issues and a rapidly-aging star who frightens everyone around him with his intensity.

CF: The fact that we'd HAVE to be starting Hassell in that situation is enough to make me cringe. A young, developing team does not need to be having an offensive liability making up 20% of it's starting lineup. Hassell needs to be coming off the bench as a defensive stopper. Also, Hawes scares me a bit, as he hasn't fully developed, and might not. What if he's all he's ever going to be? If we're moving a proven, elite, scoring big man for a good big man (Jefferson) and a completely unproven one (Hawes), that seems like a step down to me.

G: Compare apples to apples: Jefferson isn't that far off from Garnett's numbers last year. (J/G) - Minutes: (33.6/39.5) Pts: (16.5/22.4) FG%: (51.4/41.6) Reb: (11/10.4) Assists: (1.3/4.1). And you have to factor in that Jefferson is nine years younger than KG with his best years yet ahead of him. I want to have a team with a young, talented nucleus that can grow together. Of course, that means we have to trust management to draft and sign free agents correctly.

CF: And that's where I finally agree with you. In the end it all comes down to trust. Or lack thereof. I don't trust management to make any correct decisions, and so I'd rather just sit tight in my comfort zone with KG.