lipoli390 wrote:It's no secret I agree with DL that the Wolves gave up too much for Gobert. Like DL, I believe there were better, more creative ways to improve the team while still preserving critical assets and flexibility. But the analysis can't stop there. Any fair critique has to also acknowledge that the Wolves added the best interior defender in the League, still in the prime of his career, and did so without giving up any core players except, arguably, Pat Bev. The Wolves also added a really nice piece in Kyle Anderson. After some adroit maneuvering in the draft, the Wolves picked a really exciting, high upside, young prospect in Josh Minott along with a very solid prospect in Moore. The Gobert trade was a major swing for the fences move, but it wasn't a wild closed-eye swing. The move was calibrated to catapult the Wolves forward into title contention right away and for the next 3-4 years. It may or may not work and I'll always believe it was the wrong move. But the sum total of what the Wolves front office has done this summer isn't below or barely average. There were a lot of average and below average front office performers this summer. But the Wolves, in my view, had an above average summer that grades out as a B. The Wolves could have earned an A from me with more creative moves that preserved future capital and flexibility. I agree with Cam that the Lakers probably would have gotten an A from the national media if they had done the same deal deal the Wolves did.
No doubt they made lots of moves to address weaknesses and added tons of lineup flexibility. It's super hard to win a championship but they at least made moves to be considered contenders if things break in there favor and they continue to develop.
The Gobert trade was an over pay and will only look worse when Ainge moves Bev, Beasley, Bolmaro or V8 for additional picks but I can't hate on this offseason because the bottom line looks pretty impressive right now.
D-Mac wrote:I'm just going to be honest, what I see on this board and in this thread are a bunch of people choosing to be "optimistic" about this trade because the alternative sucks. I think a lot of you know better. These national guys are pretty smart (for the most part) and able to be more objective, although I think Camden made a couple good points both about a smaller market being the team to make this move and Atlanta really being the team that set the trade value precedent this offseason. I think our offseason totally deserves a C or even a D. I think these guys are right. I think it's short sighted to suggest otherwise. I think we're marginally better than we could have been with WAY cheaper (more creative) moves. Congrats TC, you came in and got a huge pay day and then made a move that any of us could have made in our sleep. I think most of us could have done better. Sure, I'll enjoy watching next year like I always do, but I think it was a flat out stupid move and deserves all the harsh grades.
Based upon your posting history I think you generally take a more pessimistic view of this team, and I'm right there with you most of the time. In this case I'm on the fence, I think over the next three years it could be really good, beyond that ... ouch! LOL
You're right, I lean pessimistic. I'd say I'm optimistic on Ant, meaning I buy the hype and I'm all in. The rest yeah, not so much. Nothing wrong with being an optimist obviously. I just say what I think. Gobert is a very good player, I just think we gave up too much for a questionable fit. Dlo seems like a good guy, and a good teammate... but then again, he really wants to be here, so maybe he's being a little extra nice. You know what they say, ugly girls have to be nice... :)
Just because someone has a different opinion doesn't mean they are right or a homer or simply an optimist. Just because a person in the media etc isn't a Wolves fan doesn't mean they are unbiased in evaluating this trade. I haven't listened much to the Dunc'd on guys in a couple years (cut back on how many sports podcasts I listened to) but those guys are REALLY about value, draft picks and assets and salary space etc. Gobert trade goes against all that. It does not surprise me they gave the Wolves a low grade because a lot of what the Wolves did in that deal goes against what I think they would do. That doesn't mean whatever their analysis of the deal is garbage though either.
Camden wrote:Not to mention, you could easily argue that the Atlanta Hawks set the market this summer with their acquisition of Dejounte Murray by giving up three first-round picks and a pick swap. Certainly, trading for the significantly better player in Rudy Gobert would ultimately cost more than that. And that's not even bringing up recent trades for other star players in Anthony Davis, James Harden, and Paul George that essentially set the precedent of what that haul should look like.
In my opinion, the biggest problem national sports media has with the Gobert trade is that it was the Minnesota Timberwolves that made the big move of the off-season and not one of the big market teams. Had Los Angeles, Miami, New York, Dallas, or even Philadelphia traded the same exact package of assets for an All-NBA caliber player the message would be much more positive. They'd attribute the move as one that is typical of a marquee franchise, that they're getting better, that they think they can contend. The reality is that more often than not the team who receives the established star player ends up satisfied with the deal while the team that receives the haul of draft picks has an uphill battle to recoup the actual on-court value they traded away. That's the harsh truth and nobody knows that better than Timberwolves fans.
I agree that they are disrespectful because it's the Wolves. A team that has had one playoff success in it's history.
I think that many people simply do not understand how valuable Gobert really is and his or the Jazzes lack of playoff success has more to do with the other crap defenders who simply suck. One guy can't do it all. You need 5 guys on defense. Sure he does more then anyone else in the league, but placing the blame on Gobert is ridiculous. Mitchell is a fucking turnstile.
I give the Wolves an A+. This was the best trade in MN sports history. Will we ultimately win a chip with Gobert? I can't say yes, but we have a chance. Anything is possible!!! Now that we have 3 legit stars.
We have a long way to go to earn the respect of the national media. They will start thinking of Edwards trade rumors before ever admitting they got our grade wrong.
lipoli390 wrote:It's no secret I agree with DL that the Wolves gave up too much for Gobert. Like DL, I believe there were better, more creative ways to improve the team while still preserving critical assets and flexibility. But the analysis can't stop there. Any fair critique has to also acknowledge that the Wolves added the best interior defender in the League, still in the prime of his career, and did so without giving up any core players except, arguably, Pat Bev. The Wolves also added a really nice piece in Kyle Anderson. After some adroit maneuvering in the draft, the Wolves picked a really exciting, high upside, young prospect in Josh Minott along with a very solid prospect in Moore. The Gobert trade was a major swing for the fences move, but it wasn't a wild closed-eye swing. The move was calibrated to catapult the Wolves forward into title contention right away and for the next 3-4 years. It may or may not work and I'll always believe it was the wrong move. But the sum total of what the Wolves front office has done this summer isn't below or barely average. There were a lot of average and below average front office performers this summer. But the Wolves, in my view, had an above average summer that grades out as a B. The Wolves could have earned an A from me with more creative moves that preserved future capital and flexibility. I agree with Cam that the Lakers probably would have gotten an A from the national media if they had done the same deal deal the Wolves did.
No doubt they made lots of moves to address weaknesses and added tons of lineup flexibility. It's super hard to win a championship but they at least made moves to be considered contenders if things break in there favor and they continue to develop.
The Gobert trade was an over pay and will only look worse when Ainge moves Bev, Beasley, Bolmaro or V8 for additional picks but I can't hate on this offseason because the bottom line looks pretty impressive right now.
You're right about the Jazz ultimately converting Beverley, Beasley, V8 and Bolmaro into more picks. I suspect they'll get at least two more first-round picks by the time the dust settles. In the end, the Jazz will have received at least seven first-round picks over the next seven drafts - at least three of them unprotected and one of them only top-5 protected. The Jazz might keep Vando and still get a couple more first-round picks. In any event, that's why many in the media have give the Wolves low marks for their off season. It looks to them like the Wolves front office executives negotiated against themselves and eventually got taken by the savvy Danny Ainge. I think they're right. However, while the Wolves front office overpaid in my view, they substantially improved the team by landing the League's best defensive big who isn't a total stiff on the offensive end while also signing Kyle Anderson and drafting a super high-upside guy at #45. That all adds up to better than a C to me.
lipoli390 wrote:It's no secret I agree with DL that the Wolves gave up too much for Gobert. Like DL, I believe there were better, more creative ways to improve the team while still preserving critical assets and flexibility. But the analysis can't stop there. Any fair critique has to also acknowledge that the Wolves added the best interior defender in the League, still in the prime of his career, and did so without giving up any core players except, arguably, Pat Bev. The Wolves also added a really nice piece in Kyle Anderson. After some adroit maneuvering in the draft, the Wolves picked a really exciting, high upside, young prospect in Josh Minott along with a very solid prospect in Moore. The Gobert trade was a major swing for the fences move, but it wasn't a wild closed-eye swing. The move was calibrated to catapult the Wolves forward into title contention right away and for the next 3-4 years. It may or may not work and I'll always believe it was the wrong move. But the sum total of what the Wolves front office has done this summer isn't below or barely average. There were a lot of average and below average front office performers this summer. But the Wolves, in my view, had an above average summer that grades out as a B. The Wolves could have earned an A from me with more creative moves that preserved future capital and flexibility. I agree with Cam that the Lakers probably would have gotten an A from the national media if they had done the same deal deal the Wolves did.
No doubt they made lots of moves to address weaknesses and added tons of lineup flexibility. It's super hard to win a championship but they at least made moves to be considered contenders if things break in there favor and they continue to develop.
The Gobert trade was an over pay and will only look worse when Ainge moves Bev, Beasley, Bolmaro or V8 for additional picks but I can't hate on this offseason because the bottom line looks pretty impressive right now.
You're right about the Jazz ultimately converting Beverley, Beasley, V8 and Bolmaro into more picks. I suspect they'll get at least two more first-round picks by the time the dust settles. In the end, the Jazz will have received at least seven first-round picks over the next seven drafts - at least three of them unprotected and one of them only top-5 protected. The Jazz might keep Vando and still get a couple more first-round picks. In any event, that's why many in the media have give the Wolves low marks for their off season. It looks to them like the Wolves front office executives negotiated against themselves and eventually got taken by the savvy Danny Ainge. I think they're right. However, while the Wolves front office overpaid in my view, they substantially improved the team by landing the League's best defensive big who isn't a total stiff on the offensive end while also signing Kyle Anderson and drafting a super high-upside guy at #45. That all adds up to better than a C to me.
The group of players the Jazz got back in the Gobert trade certainly has value but I also think there is a real chance that they don't get much value back in a deal for them. I think it's reasonable to assume Bolmaro's value is lower after summer league than before it since he couldn't make shots. He is a young player so they may want to keep him if the value is low. Beverly and Beasley you have to find matching salaries. A year ago Beverly was traded for basically junk contracts and it seems like he may have been sent where he wanted to go. What kind of return are the Jazz gonna get for Vanderbilt that will make them want to trade him? How motivated will they be to duck the luxury tax? What guys might end up bought out? Will they need to move some players because they acquire more players in a Mitchell trade than they send out etc? I think the group of players does have potential to return more value but I also think that value might not really come through for them. We will see what happens with Mitchell and what the Nets decide to do. Utah has a number of expiring contracts that are players that are worthwhile players. It will be interesting to see what they can do to maximize all their assets.
Wolves definitely improved with the Gobert addition. We went from a lower seed playoff team to top 4 team. But they also massively overpay. That is why me and others felt its championship or busts for the wolves. You just dont give up that much draft capital, 2 starters, your 6th man, your 1st pick in the latest draft and another 1st round pick sophomore player in 1 trade for 1 player.
If your giving what we gave up to add gobert to a championship level core of lebron/wade/bosh, duncan/parker/ginobili or steph/klay/green teams that will likely lead to another championship then that will surely get an A. But were adding it to an unproven kat/ant/dlo team that may still be a few years away from being championship ready.
The way I see it is that we went all in now for the next 4 years but we are fortunate that ant and Kat are still young and lock up for a long time that we can do a quick rebuild around them if Gobert didn't work out. Still, its a risk and I can see why some are down on us with the deal. That said,
I expect us to win a lot of games the next few years.
Major additions: Rudy Gobert (trade), Kyle Anderson (free agent), Austin Rivers (free agent), Wendell Moore Jr. (draft), Bryn Forbes (free agent), Josh Minott (free agent)
Major subtractions: Patrick Beverley (Utah), Jarred Vanderbilt (Utah), Malik Beasley (Utah), Leandro Bolmaro (Utah), Josh Okogie (Phoenix)
Did this team get better? They absolutely did. The Minnesota Timberwolves took massive swings this offseason. They put Tim Connelly in charge of the team after the impressive job he did in Denver. Then he traded for Gobert by sending out important role players and a historic amount of first-round draft capital. And it broke the basketball internet for a bit. Gobert has had some massive problems in the playoffs, but the Wolves have had some massive problems just getting to the playoffs. Now with Gobert, Karl-Anthony Towns, Anthony Edwards and D'Angelo Russell, they believe they should win 50 games every year and at least get to the second round before seeing how high they can climb. If they did that for three straight seasons, it would be the best stretch in Wolves history. But is that good enough to get them to the title? And can they avoid those picks to Utah biting Minnesota in the long run? Every pickup they made this summer (free agency and draft) were great additions.
lipoli390 wrote:It's no secret I agree with DL that the Wolves gave up too much for Gobert. Like DL, I believe there were better, more creative ways to improve the team while still preserving critical assets and flexibility. But the analysis can't stop there. Any fair critique has to also acknowledge that the Wolves added the best interior defender in the League, still in the prime of his career, and did so without giving up any core players except, arguably, Pat Bev. The Wolves also added a really nice piece in Kyle Anderson. After some adroit maneuvering in the draft, the Wolves picked a really exciting, high upside, young prospect in Josh Minott along with a very solid prospect in Moore. The Gobert trade was a major swing for the fences move, but it wasn't a wild closed-eye swing. The move was calibrated to catapult the Wolves forward into title contention right away and for the next 3-4 years. It may or may not work and I'll always believe it was the wrong move. But the sum total of what the Wolves front office has done this summer isn't below or barely average. There were a lot of average and below average front office performers this summer. But the Wolves, in my view, had an above average summer that grades out as a B. The Wolves could have earned an A from me with more creative moves that preserved future capital and flexibility. I agree with Cam that the Lakers probably would have gotten an A from the national media if they had done the same deal deal the Wolves did.
No doubt they made lots of moves to address weaknesses and added tons of lineup flexibility. It's super hard to win a championship but they at least made moves to be considered contenders if things break in there favor and they continue to develop.
The Gobert trade was an over pay and will only look worse when Ainge moves Bev, Beasley, Bolmaro or V8 for additional picks but I can't hate on this offseason because the bottom line looks pretty impressive right now.
You're right about the Jazz ultimately converting Beverley, Beasley, V8 and Bolmaro into more picks. I suspect they'll get at least two more first-round picks by the time the dust settles. In the end, the Jazz will have received at least seven first-round picks over the next seven drafts - at least three of them unprotected and one of them only top-5 protected. The Jazz might keep Vando and still get a couple more first-round picks. In any event, that's why many in the media have give the Wolves low marks for their off season. It looks to them like the Wolves front office executives negotiated against themselves and eventually got taken by the savvy Danny Ainge. I think they're right. However, while the Wolves front office overpaid in my view, they substantially improved the team by landing the League's best defensive big who isn't a total stiff on the offensive end while also signing Kyle Anderson and drafting a super high-upside guy at #45. That all adds up to better than a C to me.
Time will tell, I guess. But I expect the "savvy Danny Ainge" will be celebrating his A grade while watching his team lose 50 games this year, while the overpaying TC will be suffering through his lower grade while watching his team win 50+ games. Win now baby! We can lament losing picks (every other year) in the late 20s later.
FNG - I wouldn't get too cocky talking about Ainge and the Jazz. Ainge built the Celtics team that made the NBA finals last season. As a huge part of that effort, he took the Sixers to the woodshed with the deal that landed Tatum and a future first in exchange for the hapless Fultz. Previously, Ainge built a champion in Boston with the acquisitions Ray Allen and KG who he acquired from the Wolves for far less than the Wolves gave up for Rudy.
Yes, the Jazz appear to be entering a full-scale rebuild, but they're already loaded with valuable draft assets even before trading Donovan Mitchell. Meanwhile, one season-ending injury to Gobert will leave us with last year's team minus Beverley, Vando & Beasley. If you thought we weren't a genuine 46-win team last season how do you think that same team will fair this season without Pat and Vando against a tougher Western Conference? Then imagine watching the Jazz next June selecting what would have been our lottery pick in what's expected to be one of the best, deepest drafts in along time.
I'm not expecting Rudy, KAT or Edwards to go down and i think the Wolves will be a top 4 team in the West. But bad things can happen and the Jazz will come back strong in a few years.
