NBA Trade Deadline 2012: Timberwolves Smart to Hang onto Michael Beasley

Phew. Crisis averted.

My friend awoke me Thursday morning with the news that the Minnesota Timberwolves dealt forward Michael Beasley to the Los Angeles Lakers as part of a three-way deal which would brought Portland Trail Blazers guard Jamal Crawford and Lakers guard Derek Fisher to Minnesota.

Fisher is under contract next season for $3.4 million, and Crawford for $5 million (with a player option for 2012-13).

Really?

Does that deal really make Minnesota better?

If that deal had happened, Minnesota would have traded its third-most talented player (behind Ricky Rubio and Kevin Love) for two past-their-prime players.

That makes a lot of sense…much like Colgate branching out from toothpaste and trying to make food products.

It would have been the type of deal that continues to drag Timberwolves general manager David Kahn's name through the mud.

Yes, the Minnesota Timberwolves are not expected to make Beasley the $8 million qualifying offer necessary to make him a restricted free agent this summer (not offering him would make him an unrestricted free agent). Some will argue that Minnesota should have traded him and receive at least some compensation in return.

Yes, Minnesota has a strong core of young players (Love, Rubio, Derrick Williams and Nikola Pekovic to name a few) and could use more veterans on its roster.

Yes, shooting guard is Minnesota’s weakest position and Beasley is a forward, a position Minnesota has far too many players at.

Yes, Beasley doesn’t always fit in Minnesota’s scheme and doesn’t always play hard on both ends of the floor.

But the man is still a great talent.

He’s still the same talent that made some project him as a better NBA player than Bulls guard and 2010-2011 NBA MVP Derrick Rose when the two were in the 2008 NBA draft. And, he’s still only 23 years old with three full NBA seasons under his belt.

His stats this season—11.8 points and 4.6 rebounds per game—don't reflect his talent, but he’s been in and out of the starting lineup and has dealt with injury. It's tough for a player to find a groove without a defined role and consistent minutes.

Now Beasley has a defined role: He is relocated as a reserve and expected to provide an offensive punch off the bench.

Beasley has 22 games to show Minnesota that he’s willing to play defense and contribute to the game beyond the offensive end—like coach Rick Adelman wants him to, as stated in this report from the Star Tribune’s Jerry Zgoda.

The 6'10" Beasley still has the potential to be a great NBA player, or, at the least, a contributing member on a playoff-caliber team.

If Minnesota had given up on him now for an aging former Sixth Man of the Year award winner and a five-time NBA champion, it would've been a mistake the franchise would regret for years to come.

Crawford, at this point in his career, is a very average shooting guard (he's averaging 14.2 points per game this season, and averaged the same last season). He doesn’t make the T'Wolves a serious playoff contender now, nor does he put the franchise over the top in 2013. Crawford merely fills the void at Minnesota's weakest position. And he can opt out at the end of this season, likely not to re-sign with Minnesota.

And Fisher hasn't done much of anything this season with the Lakers. He's playing like a 37-year-old at the end of his career.

Beasley, on the other hand, still has the potential to turn into a heck of an NBA player.

What would you rather have: Michael Beasley for the rest of this season and the opportunity to re-sign him in the offseason, or Jamal Crawford and Derek Fisher for the rest of this season and the 2012-2013 campaign (with the real possibility that Crawford opts out after this season)?

Think about it.