Camden wrote:AbeVigodaLive wrote:Camden wrote:TheFuture wrote:Camden wrote:Lots of angst and frustration for what was done this off-season, and I understand and agree with much of it, but the future isn't bleak. Either the current roster and coaching staff will figure it out or changes will be made, some of which could effectively turn the roster over yet again. It could be as soon as this off-season that Rudy Gobert or Karl-Anthony Towns are moved for a sizable package of assets and/or proven players that better fit the core now and moving forward. I like to call that a pivot, and Minnesota very much has that in play because both Gobert and Towns are proven elite players. Their value doesn't disintegrate because they perhaps can't win playing with each other -- and it's still too early to know that. Basically, Minnesota's options are still very good in the event this experiment fails.
It's also possible that Connelly made the trade for Gobert knowing that he would deal Towns down the line, but he wanted to hitch himself to Gobert first because, frankly, he may impact winning more. And why not see if him and Towns could make it work first before dealing one of the franchise's most-loyal and longest-tenured players.
A trade of Gobert is firmly out. He couldn't possibly regain the value. Towns - Not happening either. Trade the franchise for a big to "fit" your franchise big and then trade to fit your team around the 30 year old big?? Huh?
A trade of Rudy Gobert is probably not the direction this goes, agreed, but I don't think it's because they couldn't retain value. They would almost certainly acquire much better players than what they traded for him -- Malik Beasley, Jarred Vanderbilt, Patrick Beverley, Leandro Bolmaro, Walker Kessler -- with the understanding that they wouldn't come close to getting back four future first-round picks in addition to that. It might be two good players and two picks, for example. The overall value could end up being comparable because Gobert is still an elite player, but the deal would be structured very differently -- specifically, in terms of draft capital.
I think the second part of my above comment speaks to what you're getting at. I think it's entirely possible that Tim Connelly evaluated the roster and determined that Karl-Anthony Towns wasn't the anchor that was needed for this group moving forward so he acquired Gobert, who is now his guy in the present and future. Rather than immediately deal Towns to recoup the value spent in the Gobert trade he allowed this to play out and see if two elite bigs could function together -- right or wrong -- before any more deals were made.
In short, I think Towns being on the move if this experiment went bad had already been hypothesized prior to making the trade for Gobert. There's no way this front office with their collective experience and intellect didn't prepare a pivot or some sort of lever to pull if it just didn't work out.
I don't see any way that Gobert isn't a sunk cost. There's no way the Wolves recoup as much value back for him than what they paid for him... making it a very bad to disaster of a deal.
- EVERYBODY knows the Wolves overpaid. And it's been shown that the trade didn't shift the market for how much teams would be willing to give up. Instead, other teams might have gone with the "the Wolves screwed up the market, no way we're upping the ante on that one by giving up even more."
- Gobert will be older.
- Gobert will have failed (at least in perception) with his new team.
- I'm sure the FO has a pivot in place... but that doesn't mean they're still getting less back than they initially thought for that pivot. And it doesn't mean that the Wolves weren't be in a worse spot after that pivot than they were prior to the Gobert Swindle. Basically, there's no justification for giving up THAT much for this little of a reward (thus far).
- Rudy Gobert is still Rudy Gobert. If Minnesota decided to move on from him, they're going to receive quality offers. There are still teams like Toronto, Chicago, and likely others that would have high interest in acquiring him. However, nobody's offering four future first-round picks for him. That deal just isn't materializing, but that doesn't mean the value can't or won't be comparable. It just means the incoming players would need to be of higher-quality than what they sent out originally, which is probable given what the Wolves traded away, as well as recouping a future first-round pick or more. I think those offers still exist. It's reasonable if you don't.
- I'll add that Gobert probably isn't the big that would be dealt. Tim Connelly has attached his career and his reputation to him at this point. He will likely want to see that through and will be more likely to move various parts around him in order to make it work. I also think there's a good chance that Gobert just impacts winning more than Karl-Anthony Towns, and they know that, which would lead to Towns -- not Gobert -- being the one on his way out.
Players, picks, french fries or burgers... the Wolves will not be able to recoup what they sent out for Gobert in any comparable way unless they luck out similar to what happened with Marc Gasol way back in the day for Memphis.
And sure... Towns is more likely to go. But I still don't see how this makes things any less of a giant misstep if it comes to that.
Towns isn't going to return what the Wolves gave up to land Gobert. (see my first point about Gobert above) The Wolves were in an excellent position to build on last year's success. And while some of that success was built on mirrors and cadavers, it positioned the team to make a big move.
The Wolves chose very poorly if it means they're spinning their wheels for at least a year and then trying something new with fewer assets than they initially started with. At that point, it's just spacing out fewer pieces of slightly more weathered deck furniture in a different layout and hoping nobody notices.