# T'Wolves/Lakers Trade Idea



## Silk D (Feb 6, 2006)

A deal involving Eddie Griffin for Chris Mihm was brought up in our forum. There would have to be some tweeks as the salaries don't match up, but I was just looking to get some input from Wolves' fans. Not sure what kind of role Eddie plays on your team, but we are definetly looking for a strong weakside shotblocker/rebounder. Chris Mihm is a very solid center that can give you 10-12 points, 7-8 rebounds and 1 block just about every night. Interested?


----------



## Avalanche (Nov 17, 2005)

no thanks... personally i think eddie is the better player, he just got terrible minutes towards the end of the season.
i want to use him in a deal to try and get magloire from the bucks.


----------



## JuX (Oct 11, 2005)

Finally a realistic trade scenario unlike many. Sorry, I wouldn't buy that. I'm seeking for more aggressive center and Mihm isn't what we need to look for.


----------



## LamarButler (Apr 16, 2005)

Mihm would help the team a lot more than Griffin. Mihm is a guy who can finish plays ad post up, which is more what you guys need since your a jumpshooting team. Griffin bombs from far away too much and doesnt have a good FG% plus he plays the same position as KG and Davis. 

The salaries arent that big of deal since Mihm is an expiring contract anyways.


----------



## The King of the World (Dec 28, 2003)

If Griff isn't going to get minutes next season, I would do this trade.


----------



## Avalanche (Nov 17, 2005)

i just have a feeling that, if part of a package a team may give up more talent to get eddie.
i agree though, if he's only going to play as much as he did at the end of last season then theres no point having him around.


----------



## Silk D (Feb 6, 2006)

Juxtaposed said:


> Finally a realistic trade scenario unlike many. Sorry, I wouldn't buy that. I'm seeking for more aggressive center and Mihm isn't what we need to look for.


I'm not trying to advertise mihm as an all-star, but at 4.5 million, he is definetly a bargin. Eddie is a nice player though, and I appreciate your guys' input.


----------



## Silk D (Feb 6, 2006)

Avalanche said:


> i just have a feeling that, if part of a package a team may give up more talent to get eddie.


Put KG in that "package" and we'll give you anyone you want :biggrin:


----------



## sohail (May 13, 2006)

i hoped that wolves fans would like this trade


----------



## socco (Jul 14, 2002)

Mihm doesn't do much for me. Griffin is an *elite* rebounder and shot-blocker. He obviously has other deficiencies, but because of how good he is at those aspects of the game I wouldn't give him up for just an average player like Mihm.


----------



## Avalanche (Nov 17, 2005)

for cook, jackson and a pick maybe


----------



## LamarButler (Apr 16, 2005)

> Griffin is an elite rebounder and shot-blocker. He obviously has other deficiencies, but because of how good he is at those aspects of the game I wouldn't give him up for just an average player like Mihm.


He is an elite shotblocker but hes not an elite rebounder. Mihm is average Id say for a big man and his career rebounding numbers are identical to Eddie Griffin's. Also, if Mihm is just an average player, so is Eddie. Eddie Griffin is a crazy good shotblocker and can bomb threes, but he shoots an ugly field goal percentage and has attitude problems. Mihm is only good in home games and doesn't block shots as well, but he scores more on a way better FG%. He actually has a post game which would be better for the Wolves since everybody else shoots J's all the time.


----------



## Damian Necronamous (Jun 10, 2002)

Chris Mihm is a much more valuable player than Eddie Griffin...


----------



## socco (Jul 14, 2002)

LamarButler said:


> He is an elite shotblocker but hes not an elite rebounder. Mihm is average Id say for a big man and his career rebounding numbers are identical to Eddie Griffin's. Also, if Mihm is just an average player, so is Eddie. Eddie Griffin is a crazy good shotblocker and can bomb threes, but he shoots an ugly field goal percentage and has attitude problems. Mihm is only good in home games and doesn't block shots as well, but he scores more on a way better FG%. He actually has a post game which would be better for the Wolves since everybody else shoots J's all the time.


First of all, Griffin absolutely does not have attitude problems. He's had alot of problems in his life, but he definately doesn't have "attitude problems".

And I never said he wasn't an average player. The reason why I like him is because of how good he is at certain aspects of the game. There's no player that averages more rebounds and blocks combined per 48 minutes than Griffin. I'm not saying he's better, but he can completely change games at times, Mihm can't do that. That's the reason why I'd rather have Griffin.


----------



## KDOS (Nov 29, 2005)

How could a Laker fan even offer our most reliable producing Center throughout the season to a underachieving lottery pick malcontent is beyond me.


----------



## LamarButler (Apr 16, 2005)

> How could a Laker fan even offer our most reliable producing Center throughout the season to a underachieving lottery pick malcontent is beyond me.


Cause Kwame Brown is better at C and we need a PF. Eddie Griffin can play D and block shots like crazy. Hed space the floor for Kwame unlike what Mihm did which was just clog the paint.


----------



## Jaj (Jun 15, 2005)

The trade is in favor of the T'Wolves if it's a C for PF straight-up(all in all considered the same treatment for Griffin by coaches). If you guys re-sign Marcus Banks and then proceed to trade him+Griffin for Mihm+McKie that's even. Worst comes to worst we can give you guys Brian Cook as well.


----------



## JBoog35 (Nov 21, 2005)

I've been thinking about this a lot, and to be absolutely honest, I think that this is the most decent offer I've even heard of yet by people other than wolves fans. I understand that their will be other parts to this trade, but Bynum and Kwame look to be the future not Mihm, so they move him. Griffin isn't being used correctly and could really help another team, makes sense to move him. The only question is, who gets moved? I know the Wolves absolutely wouldn't take McKie, being we have a player like that who is younger, yet just as useless (Jaric). Wolves can take on more salary because of the trade exception they still have, that being said... 

Griffin for Mihm won't happen, what would make more sense is a three way deal, where Griffin, and or Jaric and or Hudson and or Ricky Davis go and the Wolves get Mihm, a big man, and a shooter. Lakers getting Griffin, Hudson, player from other team.


----------



## endora60 (Jan 5, 2006)

Silk D said:


> A deal involving Eddie Griffin for Chris Mihm was brought up in our forum. There would have to be some tweeks as the salaries don't match up, but I was just looking to get some input from Wolves' fans. Not sure what kind of role Eddie plays on your team, but we are definetly looking for a strong weakside shotblocker/rebounder. Chris Mihm is a very solid center that can give you 10-12 points, 7-8 rebounds and 1 block just about every night. Interested?


I like Mihm a lot; he's worked hard with Kareem and improved a great deal--or was improving until he got hurt. With the emergence of Kwame as a power, though, and the fact that Andy Bynum's as close to untouchable as any rookie can be, Mihm's odd man out.

I'd like to see him get a nice spot on a good team; he's a good guy, a hard worker and a better-than-average player. Minnesota's not the place for him, though; LA can get more for him than Griffin _and _ I don't see him being right for the Wolves. Somehow this deal doesn't work on either end, IMO.

Laurie


----------



## Jaj (Jun 15, 2005)

endora60 said:


> I like Mihm a lot; he's worked hard with Kareem and improved a great deal--or was improving until he got hurt. With the emergence of Kwame as a power, though, and the fact that Andy Bynum's as close to untouchable as any rookie can be, Mihm's odd man out.
> 
> I'd like to see him get a nice spot on a good team; he's a good guy, a hard worker and a better-than-average player. Minnesota's not the place for him, though; LA can get more for him than Griffin _and _ I don't see him being right for the Wolves. Somehow this deal doesn't work on either end, IMO.
> 
> Laurie


I can't see how this trade doesn't work. Yes Mihm is worth more than Griffin but re-signing Banks and trading him to the Lakers is compensation enough(saving L.A. money on its precious MLE use), however without looking into fillers and such look at the primary deal. Griffin would work at PF for the Lakers because he can shot-block and help out Kwame on D tremendously. On offense when Lamar drives he can give the ball out to Griffin to shoot. It's a constant switching of the "3" and the "4". 

For the T'Wolves, Griffin is just not being used for problems with coaches I'm not sure I 100% understand even. However, Mihm would be a very good complement to K.G. and easily the best out of the terrible group of Cs that have started next to him lately. Since Marbury almost seems destined to go back to Minnesota for relatively cheap, something like Jaric+fillers, the line-up would look like

PG- Marbury
SG- Hassell
SF- Davis
PF- Garnett
C- Mihm

That's a significant improvement over last year's group.


----------



## JBoog35 (Nov 21, 2005)

:laugh: I think that Mihm is good, but Bynum would be better :bsmile:


----------



## Silk D (Feb 6, 2006)

JBoog35 said:


> I've been thinking about this a lot, and to be absolutely honest, I think that this is the most decent offer I've even heard of yet by people other than wolves fans.


Yeah, I can imagine you guys get a lot of "KG for Crap" trade ideas. Lucky for us, everyone hates our superstar, so nobody comes in our forum with any absurd Kobe trade ideas.

Anyway, the lakers are stuck with Kwame, and are waiting on bynum. I think eddie griffin is the perfect type of player to go along side them at the 4. If you guys can S&T marcus banks, even better. Thanks for the input wolves fans...


----------



## JBoog35 (Nov 21, 2005)

Would the Lakers first rounder be available if such a trade would come about? Is that untouchable, or is Griffin and filler for Mihm and late first rounder somewhat acceptable give or take who the filler is.


----------



## Avalanche (Nov 17, 2005)

Jaj said:


> The trade is in favor of the T'Wolves if it's a C for PF straight-up(all in all considered the same treatment for Griffin by coaches). If you guys re-sign Marcus Banks and then proceed to trade him+Griffin for Mihm+McKie that's even. Worst comes to worst we can give you guys Brian Cook as well.


no way i'm giving up banks for mihm and mckie... i wouldnt give banks straight up (at the moment with lack of quality pg's anyway) .. and if we were to trade him to the lakers with eddie i think we could get more back with only smush running pg in LA


----------



## Silk D (Feb 6, 2006)

Avalanche said:


> no way i'm giving up banks for mihm and mckie... i wouldnt give banks straight up (at the moment with lack of quality pg's anyway) .. and if we were to trade him to the lakers with eddie i think we could get more back with only smush running pg in LA


Talent wise yes, I see your point. But Banks isn't exactly a with the wolves anymore, so you might lose him for nothing. He would just be thrown in to match salaries, if he agreed to be signed and traded.


----------



## Avalanche (Nov 17, 2005)

Silk D said:


> Talent wise yes, I see your point. But Banks isn't exactly a with the wolves anymore, so you might lose him for nothing. He would just be thrown in to match salaries, if he agreed to be signed and traded.


i only see banks not re-signing if someone along the lines of marbury or another high profile pg is brought in via trade.. if thats the case i think we could sign and trade banks for something very useful... to someone like the lakers, the hawks, the rockets etc... teams who lack a pg, or at least lack any depth at the PG spot.


----------



## JuX (Oct 11, 2005)

Avalanche said:


> no way i'm giving up banks for mihm and mckie... i wouldnt give banks straight up (at the moment with lack of quality pg's anyway) .. and if we were to trade him to the lakers with eddie i think we could get more back with only smush running pg in LA


It'd be like Mihm for Banks straight up. McKie is going to be done. Brotherly Love of Philadelphia is a destination is that he wanted to go after his tenure with the Lakers is over. What would that help both teams, anyways?


----------



## Avalanche (Nov 17, 2005)

Juxtaposed said:


> It'd be like Mihm for Banks straight up. McKie is going to be done. Brotherly Love of Philadelphia is a destination is that he wanted to go after his tenure with the Lakers is over. What would that help both teams, anyways?


if banks isnt going to come back anyway then a S&T for mihm would be ok.
i'd like to get a pick out of the deal though, or some 3 pt shooting.


----------



## socco (Jul 14, 2002)

Silk D said:


> Talent wise yes, I see your point. But Banks isn't exactly a with the wolves anymore, so you might lose him for nothing. He would just be thrown in to match salaries, if he agreed to be signed and traded.


If Banks is willing to sign for only $2.4Mil (which he would have to if he is used in a sign and trade), he's going to be a member of the Minnesota Timberwolves.


----------



## Avalanche (Nov 17, 2005)

socco said:


> If Banks is willing to sign for only $2.4Mil (which he would have to if he is used in a sign and trade), he's going to be a member of the Minnesota Timberwolves.


thats about it...
i think the wolves will do everything they can to keep banks around for next season.


----------



## Silk D (Feb 6, 2006)

socco said:


> If Banks is willing to sign for only $2.4Mil (which he would have to if he is used in a sign and trade), he's going to be a member of the Minnesota Timberwolves.


I'm not going to get into this kind of argument, I'm sure you guys know how a S&T works. 

It's very possible, though, that Banks will be willing to sign with another team for less than he would want from minny, if he gets a chance to play, or even start. I know he started a great deal of games for you guys, but he knows he will always have to fight for that spot with Marco Jaric, and Troy Hudson. And with you guys possibly pursuing Stephon Marbury, I doubt Banks will want to stick around.

It's all moot, though, let's just see what happens.


----------



## JuX (Oct 11, 2005)

As much as I hate to see this happen but I think it could be the 2nd time in 5 years we let a player, specifically a point guard, go and then blossom out into another level with another team. It'd be such a waste, even if Marbury would ever return. 

Is there any chance they is willing to dump Hudson or trade Jaric/Hudson?


----------



## abwowang (Mar 7, 2006)

well everything we been talkin about with starbury is going to be put on hold until we kno wussup with larry brown..

if larry brown is bought out.. then ... starbury stays in NY.. if larry brown stays.. then starbury remains possibility... 

but as of everything ESPN has been sayin.. i think starbury is stayin in ny.


----------



## socco (Jul 14, 2002)

Silk D said:


> I'm not going to get into this kind of argument, I'm sure you guys know how a S&T works.


The reason why he can only be used in a sign and trade for that little of an amount is kinda complicated. The Celtics didn't pick up the last year of his contract, so if we want to resign him it has to be a contract starting at no more than what that final year would've been worth ($2.4Mil). Anything more than that and the Wolves will have to use the MLE. And under no circumstances can you sign and trade a player using the MLE. 



Silk D said:


> It's very possible, though, that Banks will be willing to sign with another team for less than he would want from minny, if he gets a chance to play, or even start. I know he started a great deal of games for you guys, but he knows he will always have to fight for that spot with Marco Jaric, and Troy Hudson. And with you guys possibly pursuing Stephon Marbury, I doubt Banks will want to stick around.


I would actually say it's the exact opposite. It's clear that he would be starting over Jaric and Hudson. And the Wolves actually gave him a chance. He was almost released before the season, and now he's the full-time starter for a team. If he's going to take less to be somewhere, chances are that its in Minnesota. His career was going nowhere. If the Wolves didn't trade for him and give him a chance to actually prove he can play he'd be a complete nobody in this league right now. He wasn't getting any minutes in Boston, then he came here and started. That's a huge difference, and something that certainly could incline a player to resign for less. And are there really many other teams who don't have a PG better than Marko Jaric or Troy Hudson? Seriously now. If that's considered competition he'd have competition on every team.


----------



## Silk D (Feb 6, 2006)

socco said:


> And are there really many other teams who don't have a PG better than Marko Jaric or Troy Hudson? Seriously now. If that's considered competition he'd have competition on every team.


How about Smush Parker, and Sasha Vujacic.  :biggrin: 

You make some good points, though, and I guess we'll just have to see where Marcus ends up next year.

BTW, banks isn't who I want, Eddie Griffin is who I want.


----------



## JBoog35 (Nov 21, 2005)

Trust me, Eddie Griffin is on the block.


----------



## JuX (Oct 11, 2005)

You can have Eddie, but in order to get him, they gotta get the equal in return. It means getting a big man and a point guard.


----------



## Avalanche (Nov 17, 2005)

abwowang said:


> well everything we been talkin about with starbury is going to be put on hold until we kno wussup with larry brown..
> 
> if larry brown is bought out.. then ... starbury stays in NY.. if larry brown stays.. then starbury remains possibility...
> 
> but as of everything ESPN has been sayin.. i think starbury is stayin in ny.


i dont think NY will be able to keep both francis and marbury around though.... failed experiment right there.
i think one of those 2 will be traded in the off-season, starbury is my guess, but it could be either


----------



## socco (Jul 14, 2002)

Avalanche said:


> i dont think NY will be able to keep both francis and marbury around though


You don't think they'll be able to keep them around? Who's going to take either of those guys? As far as I know there are *no* teams in the league that have any interest in Francis, and only *one* who has any interest in Marbury (us :dead. It's not a question of whether they will be able to keep them around, the question is if there is a team stupid enough to actually want either of those guys.


----------



## Avalanche (Nov 17, 2005)

socco said:


> You don't think they'll be able to keep them around? Who's going to take either of those guys? As far as I know there are *no* teams in the league that have any interest in Francis, and only *one* who has any interest in Marbury (us :dead. It's not a question of whether they will be able to keep them around, the question is if there is a team stupid enough to actually want either of those guys.


i think there are a few teams that would take a chance on them... despirate teams, us, possibly the pacers, possibly houston, lakers, memphis....

very very unlikely to find a trade for them, but if they are going for cheap they are talented players who could fetch some sort of interest at least


----------



## jokeaward (May 22, 2003)

I would do this trade, Mihm would be okay and easier for Casey to coach/figure out.


----------



## JuX (Oct 11, 2005)

All I want to see a center who can play inside and able to box out really well with good shooting abilities. We're one of those teams who don't rebound really well. I don't think we ever had a quality center. Not even Rasho. He is nowhere near it.

See Michael Olowokandi. :dead:


----------



## Timmons (May 25, 2005)

socco said:


> You don't think they'll be able to keep them around? *Who's going to take either of those guys? As far as I know there are no teams in the league that have any interest in Francis*, and only *one* who has any interest in Marbury (us :dead. It's not a question of whether they will be able to keep them around, the question is if there is a team stupid enough to actually want either of those guys.


Pacers might possibly be interested in Francis. We'll see who gets moved in a few months. But the Knicks will make some moves for sure and one of those guys will be involved if not both.


----------



## Jaj (Jun 15, 2005)

It would seem to me that the only reason the Wolves are truly interested in Marbury is that frankly their contracts suck. Starbury is the best overall player available for deals like Marko Jaric's.

In my opinion he fits well.

A starting line-up of

PG- Marbury
SG- McCants
SF- Davis
PF- Garnett
C- Mihm

Just might be able to keep Garnett in Minnesota for atleast a few more years. Why is it sensible? McCants isn't a ball dominating player and can be a spot up shooter not just a slasher like are large amount of the guys entering the league. Davis is an overall good but not dominating scorer. Garnett well is Garnett regardless of who is playing around him and Mihm would work, helping Garnett with a decent amount of blocks 10-11 ppg. Blount would be used against larger Cs. 

I just think Minnesota is one of the few places that Marbury could thrive in. I'd say considering he's 29 he'd still probably put up around his career average of 20.2 pgg, 8.1 assists, on .45% shooting(yes I realize that's higher than his average but it's actually gone up in recent years). 

What's the trade for Marbury? If Brown stays(Marbury probably wouldn't be traded if he left anyway), 
Marko Jaric(versatility), Hassell(hard-nosed defense I'm sure will intrigue Brown), and one more contract around 3.7m to atleast get close to the 25% rule. Frankly this is where the trouble starts and I'm not sure how willing the Knicks are to accept Troy Hudson. If the Knicks are willing to do it, it'll probably take a future pick from Minny or a 2nd this year. With such few players on the roster however depending on lottery position Minny might be willing to trade down for the Knicks' two 1sts and a future pick.

Minny's benefit? Gets rid of quite a few dead deals for one player who would likely become one of the top PGs in the league again in Minnesota. 

Knicks' benefit? Versatile player in Jaric, good defender in Hassell, good scorer if he comes back well from his injury in Hudson, and addition through subtraction.

This deal could offcourse work with Steve Francis as well.


----------



## socco (Jul 14, 2002)

Timmons said:


> Pacers might possibly be interested in Francis. We'll see who gets moved in a few months. But the Knicks will make some moves for sure and one of those guys will be involved if not both.


The reason I made that post was because I was actually told a couple days ago by somebody in the know that there aren't any teams interested in Francis and the Wolves were the only team that had any interest in Marbury.


----------



## Avalanche (Nov 17, 2005)

Jaj said:


> I just think Minnesota is one of the few places that Marbury could thrive in. I'd say considering he's 29 he'd still probably put up around his career average of 20.2 pgg, 8.1 assists, on .45% shooting(yes I realize that's higher than his average but it's actually gone up in recent years).


I actually agree with the above, which is really why i havnt been against trading for marbury since the rumour started quite a while ago.
i think he and kg would team up quite well.
i really dont want to give up hassel (even though we will probably have to) , after the season he's had i'd really preffer to have him coming off the bench to cover the firepower swingman in the L


----------

