lipoli390 wrote:monsterpile wrote:lipoli390 wrote:I was wondering what it would have taken for the Wolves to get Clint Capela. When I consider all the things I would have preferred to see the Wolves do instead of the Gobert deal, it would have been trading for Capela. It's impossible to know exactly what it would have taken, but I feel very safe in saying that it would have taken a lot less than it took to get Gobert. The Hawks were trying to shore up their defense and take a big step forward back into the playoffs. That's what prompted them to give up three picks for Murray - an excellent defender who could also relieve Trae Young of some of his playmaking and ball-handling responsibilities. I suspect that the Hawks would have loved to get some of those three picks back while also getting another player to upgrade their defense.
My guess is that the Wolves could have gotten Capela for Vando, two future firsts and either Beasley or Beverley. If I'm right, the Wolves would have substantially upgraded their rebounding and interior defense by adding Capela, but they'd also still have Kessler, Bolmaro, both their 2027 and 2029 first-round picks and ether Beasley or Beverley. Capela is two years younger than Gobert on a much more team-friendly contract. I would have felt much better about that deal.
It would have been a kick in the groin when the Wolves could have probably had Capela for one asset in the Covington trade if they had wanted him. I was an advocate of doing just that at the time although I thought the return they got from Covington was pretty good. I think if the Wolves would have given up that much for Capela people would have been more upset than maybe even this Gobert deal.
Well, I remember being unhappy the Wolves didn't simply swap Covington, Jordan Bell and a future 2nd-round pick for Covington. And that's in spite of the fact that I've always liked Beasley. But Rosas was obsessed with going small just as Finch seems obsessed now with going big.
I don't think fans or the League would have been nearly as hard on the Wolves for the Capela deal I suggested. In my scenario, the Wolves would have only given up two further 1st-round picks rather than four. They'd still have Kessler, Bolmaro and either Beasley or Beverley. Moreover, the Wolves would have a terrific rebounding defensive center who is two years younger than Gobert and on a MUCH cheaper contract.
At this point I don't really care much about either Beasley or Bolmaro. We essentially replaced Beasley with Forbes who is probably better a being a situational bench player than Beasley for less money. He could end up being a cheap option for more than 1 year as well. Beasley if he stayed here probably was gonna get a decent amount of money.
Bolmaro...I like him but at this point how much better of a prospect is he than who ever player we end up with on a 2-way deal or Moore or whoever else? He also will cost more money than a vet min guy. I'd rather have Beverly and Bolmaro but the difference between them and the guys that will take their roster spots isn't that significant when salary is considered.
Beverly? Yeah I'd like to keep him.
So let's be optimistic about your trade and assume we keep Beverly. We then have Kessler and 2 first round picks. I think we can agree that Gobert is worth at least 1 more first round pick than acquiring Capela even though he costs more money. The whole premise of not being happy with the Gobert trade is that we gave up too much or possibly overbid compared to what was or wasn't offered. IMO you did the same for Capela. I would have been pissed if we did that deal. That's more the kind of package that we would have been considering months ago when John Collins was the guy that looked like a good target. I'm a big fan of Capela but I don't think the market is that strong for him and if it was I'd pass. I'd rather overpay for Gobert than Capela.
