NBA Playoffs - Positive Take-Aways For Wolves

[FNG]

Monster, I agree... Culver's salary does look unattractive compared to some of those players you mention. But one big difference between him and some of the guys in your post is that just two years ago he led a fairly mediocre (at least offensively...they did play some stellar defense) Texas Tech team to a 31-7 record and an overtime loss in the NCAA championship game. So he showed he can perform during the regular season and under the big lights. So it's not preposterous to think he can at least approach the level of play he achieved as a 19 year old...a level he hasn't even sniffed in the NBA. Pipe dream? Perhaps. But a lot of GMs have that tournament run in their memory bank, and might be willing to take a chance on seeing if a new environment is all he needs. My preference is to keep him and see if he can find his lost game, but including him in a deal to a team that sees more potential than perhaps we do is also a possibility.

Remember when it was a joke that the Wolves would select the tournament's most valuable player every draft? How many of those guys have been meh in the league?

Lu Dort as a freshman led his team to a 22-11 record. Naz Reid played on a team that only lost 7 games and made it to the sweet 16.

Jarrett Culver went 5-22 in that championship game. The previous game he shot 3-12. So about those bright lights...

Yeah, he really struggled in the final four as he attracted all the defensive attention. Than again, he averaged 22/7/5 in the first four games of the tournament, and that included games against Michigan and Gonzaga. And he was almost a 1-man team on offense as he led the team in points, assists and rebounds for the season. Naz and Lu had a lot of help on their teams...Naz was second fiddle to Tremont Waters and Remy Martin averaged 19 PPG for ASU his final two years. That's why I was so impressed with Culver, because he figuratively put his teammates on his back that season. But what a disappointment he has been...

[Monster]

Monster, I agree... Culver's salary does look unattractive compared to some of those players you mention. But one big difference between him and some of the guys in your post is that just two years ago he led a fairly mediocre (at least offensively...they did play some stellar defense) Texas Tech team to a 31-7 record and an overtime loss in the NCAA championship game. So he showed he can perform during the regular season and under the big lights. So it's not preposterous to think he can at least approach the level of play he achieved as a 19 year old...a level he hasn't even sniffed in the NBA. Pipe dream? Perhaps. But a lot of GMs have that tournament run in their memory bank, and might be willing to take a chance on seeing if a new environment is all he needs. My preference is to keep him and see if he can find his lost game, but including him in a deal to a team that sees more potential than perhaps we do is also a possibility.

Remember when it was a joke that the Wolves would select the tournament's most valuable player every draft? How many of those guys have been meh in the league?

Lu Dort as a freshman led his team to a 22-11 record. Naz Reid played on a team that only lost 7 games and made it to the sweet 16.

Jarrett Culver went 5-22 in that championship game. The previous game he shot 3-12. So about those bright lights...

Yeah, he really struggled in the final four as he attracted all the defensive attention. Than again, he averaged 22/7/5 in the first four games of the tournament, and that included games against Michigan and Gonzaga. And he was almost a 1-man team on offense as he led the team in points, assists and rebounds for the season. Naz and Lu had a lot of help on their teams...Naz was second fiddle to Tremont Waters and Remy Martin averaged 19 PPG for ASU his final two years. That's why I was so impressed with Culver, because he figuratively put his teammates on his back that season. But what a disappointment he has been...

The thing is those guys went undrafted and initially signed 2-way contracts and are now better so why exactly should we be concerned with what Culver did in college over 2 years ago? I'll be honest if I had to choose between paying McLaughlin the vet min and Culver over 6 million it's not a hard decision to add J-Mac. He wasn't as impressive this year and I don't have high hopes for him being more than a solid bench guy. Personally I don't see Culver becoming more than a solid starter at best. That's just not exciting upside and if we are honest at this point he simply can't shoot.

This is what I and Abe have kept saying. What exactly makes Culver so appealing that teams can't sign a guy for less that does what he does or maybe even has more upside for much less. Cam Reddish might be showing why Culver might be able to be useful but guys like Cam Payne, Terence Mann make a case for signing a guy for dirt cheap and hope you found a gem.

Hopefully there are teams out there that actually think Culver still has some legit upside because as much as I do believe he could still be a worthwhile player if we can move him without paying to do so then I would jump on it. I'd really rather take a chance on someone else that fits the roster needs better.

[Lipoli390]

Monster, I agree... Culver's salary does look unattractive compared to some of those players you mention. But one big difference between him and some of the guys in your post is that just two years ago he led a fairly mediocre (at least offensively...they did play some stellar defense) Texas Tech team to a 31-7 record and an overtime loss in the NCAA championship game. So he showed he can perform during the regular season and under the big lights. So it's not preposterous to think he can at least approach the level of play he achieved as a 19 year old...a level he hasn't even sniffed in the NBA. Pipe dream? Perhaps. But a lot of GMs have that tournament run in their memory bank, and might be willing to take a chance on seeing if a new environment is all he needs. My preference is to keep him and see if he can find his lost game, but including him in a deal to a team that sees more potential than perhaps we do is also a possibility.

Remember when it was a joke that the Wolves would select the tournament's most valuable player every draft? How many of those guys have been meh in the league?

Lu Dort as a freshman led his team to a 22-11 record. Naz Reid played on a team that only lost 7 games and made it to the sweet 16.

Jarrett Culver went 5-22 in that championship game. The previous game he shot 3-12. So about those bright lights...

Here's the deal. Lu Dort and Naz Reid weren't considered top 6 prospects coming out of college; Culver was. There were obviously a lot of reason behind Culver being a consensus top 6 or 7 pick while Dort and Reid weren't even considered top 60 players. Those reasons don't simply disappear in two years, especially when you consider the relatively unique and challenging circumstances Culver has faced in his first to NBA seasons.

Would every front office in the NBA choose Naz Reid over Culver right now if choosing between those two? Of course they would. Naz Reid is a better NBA player than Culver right now and he has a more team-friendly contract. Having said that, I would expect a lot more than a 2nd round pick in return for Reid. In fact, I'd expect more than a lottery-protected first. There have to be some NBA teams that will give up a future 2nd-round pick and pay Culver $6.5M for one season to strengthen their defense off the bench and in the hope that the attributes that made him a consensus top 6 pick will begin to bear fruit in his third season with a change of scenery after a normal off-season and a full training camp.

To me, the question for the Wolves is whether to keep him or trade him for low value. I just don't agree with those who believe Culver has zero or negative trade value. His market value right now is low based on his play, but in my view it's not zero and certainly not negative. Would his value be more if he had Naz Reid's contract? Yes. Nevertheless, NBA teams sell 2nd-round picks for cash. There are certainly some teams out there that would swap a future 2nd round pick for Culver. The key for the Wolves, in my view, would be finding a team with cap room who would swap a future 2nd round pick for Culver and accordingly drop the Wolves another $6.5M below the luxury tax level.

If the Wolves really want to make a splash in the trade market this off-season, they'll have to trade KAT, DLO, Beasley, Ant, McDaniels or Naz Reid.

[Monster]

Monster, I agree... Culver's salary does look unattractive compared to some of those players you mention. But one big difference between him and some of the guys in your post is that just two years ago he led a fairly mediocre (at least offensively...they did play some stellar defense) Texas Tech team to a 31-7 record and an overtime loss in the NCAA championship game. So he showed he can perform during the regular season and under the big lights. So it's not preposterous to think he can at least approach the level of play he achieved as a 19 year old...a level he hasn't even sniffed in the NBA. Pipe dream? Perhaps. But a lot of GMs have that tournament run in their memory bank, and might be willing to take a chance on seeing if a new environment is all he needs. My preference is to keep him and see if he can find his lost game, but including him in a deal to a team that sees more potential than perhaps we do is also a possibility.

Remember when it was a joke that the Wolves would select the tournament's most valuable player every draft? How many of those guys have been meh in the league?

Lu Dort as a freshman led his team to a 22-11 record. Naz Reid played on a team that only lost 7 games and made it to the sweet 16.

Jarrett Culver went 5-22 in that championship game. The previous game he shot 3-12. So about those bright lights...

Here's the deal. Lu Dort and Naz Reid weren't considered top 6 prospects coming out of college; Culver was. There were obviously a lot of reason behind Culver being a consensus top 6 or 7 pick while Dort and Reid weren't even considered top 60 players. Those reasons don't simply disappear in two years, especially when you consider the relatively unique and challenging circumstances Culver has faced in his first to NBA seasons.

Would every front office in the NBA choose Naz Reid over Culver right now if choosing between those two? Of course they would. Naz Reid is a better NBA player than Culver right now and he has a more team-friendly contract. Having said that, I would expect a lot more than a 2nd round pick in return for Reid. In fact, I'd expect more than a lottery-protected first. There have to be some NBA teams that will give up a future 2nd-round pick and pay Culver $6.5M for one season to strengthen their defense off the bench and in the hope that the attributes that made him a consensus top 6 pick will begin to bear fruit in his third season with a change of scenery after a normal off-season and a full training camp.

To me, the question for the Wolves is whether to keep him or trade him for low value. I just don't agree with those who believe Culver has zero or negative trade value. His market value right now is low based on his play, but in my view it's not zero and certainly not negative. Would his value be more if he had Naz Reid's contract? Yes. Nevertheless, NBA teams sell 2nd-round picks for cash. There are certainly some teams out there that would swap a future 2nd round pick for Culver. The key for the Wolves, in my view, would be finding a team with cap room who would swap a future 2nd round pick for Culver and accordingly drop the Wolves another $6.5M below the luxury tax level.

If the Wolves really want to make a splash in the trade market this off-season, they'll have to trade KAT, DLO, Beasley, Ant, McDaniels or Naz Reid.

My whole point is why would a team give up any kind of asset and pay Culver more than triple the salary (actually in some cases nearly 4x) when they can sign a guy or draft a guy with that pick that may end up being better? Is Culver right now better than say even Kelan Martin? Teams could sign a not old vet in Nwaba for cheap. The last team to sell a 2nd round pick for cash was in 2018. Last draft the Pistons got a 2nd round pick (36) for taking on Tony Bradley who made much less. That's how teams have been using pick to get teams to take on guys they didn't want more than just selling them. There are ale team this season that may sell if they have a bunch of them when they are on the clock. The point is would I trade for Culver or hope I can sign the next Moses Brown, Naz Reid, Cam Payne, lu Dort even Jordan McLaughlin etc etc or even just sign a guy that I know will probably be a decent NBA player because they are a decent vet? It only takes one team (well maybe 2) to believe in Culver and want him but...I personally remain skeptical about that because there are simply other much more cost effective options.

Now have I somewhat cherry picked some success stories? Sure (especially from that draft class which seems quite deep) but let's be honest it's also possible Culver could be out of the league in a year or 2. My guess is he at least sticks around and has sort of a Wes Johnson type career but that's not exactly exciting is it? Just for fun I'll mention any team right now can sign Culver's former college teammate Zhire Smith who got waived by Detroit this season after they traded Bradley for him. I believe Smith would even be eligible to be signed as a 2-way player.

Just to be clear I think your position and FNG has merit and we have discussed this quite a bit over the past couple months. I posted in this thread with some hope for Culver with Reddish having some success. My guess is there are people in the Wolves organization that aren't ready to give up on Culver especially since it's unlikely they get any significant value from moving him unless it's part of a bigger deal. I have stated I personally would like to keep him if salaries didn't particularly matter. That's not the case as the Wolves need a little space just to add even 1 FA big and as I have also said I'll be happy if we don't have to pay an asset to move him. At this point time will tell and I'll be elated to be wrong on my Culver value evaluation. One thing I feel pretty strongly about is there are going to be a lot of moves this offseason so that will open up opportunities to make deals that don't really seem to be there now. It would be nice to see a deal where we move Culver to a team for a similar salary guy that's a big balancing out the roster. Maybe that type of deal will happen with a guy like Layman instead.

Edit: I should also clarify that I hope this has been a good back and forth on Culver's value each side trying to show more about their position with each post.

Also the guys I have mentioned undrafted guys...make me feel more ok about if we have to give up another 2nd round pick to get off Culver. Honesty if we could give up a 2nd to completely wash out hands of him and his over 6 million bucks...honestly that wouldn't be a bad deal if we use the financial flexibility well. Each roster spot matters and trading Culver would also allow for another player on the roster. The G-league and 2-way players are going to allow for more solid players to be found on NBA rosters. In no way do I support dumping 2nd rounders but saving Culver's salary (minus a vet min salary slot) does make a lot of sense. I may need to book that plane ticket to Vegas so I can cheer Culver on and raise his trade value up to the level of two 2nd round picks! ;)

[Lipoli390]

Monster - Yes, it's been a good back and forth.

You asked the following: My whole point is why would a team give up any kind of asset and pay Culver more than triple the salary (actually in some cases nearly 4x) when they can sign a guy or draft a guy with that pick that may end up being better? Is Culver right now better than say even Kelan Martin? My one-word answer to your first question is upside. My one-word answer to your second question (better than Martin?) is no. I think we should have kept Martin and traded Culver. I think Culver's market value last summer was a future lottery-protected 1st. This summer I think it's a future 2nd. I really like Martin. He, Naz and JMac were really nice undrafted free-agent signings by Rosas.

It's fun to think about how you and I are sort of splitting hairs on this one. You think we'd have to give up a future 2nd to trade Culver while I think we could acquire one. Given the track record of 2nd-round picks historically in the NBA, we're not having a particularly consequential debate. :) I think you make an excellent point about undrafted prospects as a reason to feel better if we end up trading a 2nd rounder to part with Culver.

As I mentioned, if we can get a future second round pick in return for Culver this summer with little or no salary in return, I'd pull the trigger. If we had to give up a 2nd rounder to clear his salary off the books this summer, I'd be tempted to pull the trigger, but reluctant (especially given how many future 2nd round picks we've already given up). The third possibility you suggested would be trading Culver for a big with a similar salary. Of course, the big we get in return would probably have to a similarly disappointing young player.

We'll just have to see how things shake out. If we move Beasley, Okogie or even Nowell, then keeping Culver makes more sense, although it still might be best to deal him. Whether it's worth giving up a future 2nd rounder to clear Culver's salary from the books depends on who the Wolves would be able to sign as a free agent using that additional $6.5M in luxury tax space.

[Monster]

Monster - Yes, it's been a good back and forth.

You asked the following: My whole point is why would a team give up any kind of asset and pay Culver more than triple the salary (actually in some cases nearly 4x) when they can sign a guy or draft a guy with that pick that may end up being better? Is Culver right now better than say even Kelan Martin? My one-word answer to your first question is upside. My one-word answer to your second question (better than Martin?) is no. I think we should have kept Martin and traded Culver. I think Culver's market value last summer was a future lottery-protected 1st. This summer I think it's a future 2nd. I really like Martin. He, Naz and JMac were really nice undrafted free-agent signings by Rosas.

It's fun to think about how you and I are sort of splitting hairs on this one. You think we'd have to give up a future 2nd to trade Culver while I think we could acquire one. Given the track record of 2nd-round picks historically in the NBA, we're not having a particularly consequential debate. :) I think you make an excellent point about undrafted prospects as a reason to feel better if we end up trading a 2nd rounder to part with Culver.

As I mentioned, if we can get a future second round pick in return for Culver this summer with little or no salary in return, I'd pull the trigger. If we had to give up a 2nd rounder to clear his salary off the books this summer, I'd be tempted to pull the trigger, but reluctant (especially given how many future 2nd round picks we've already given up). The third possibility you suggested would be trading Culver for a big with a similar salary. Of course, the big we get in return would probably have to a similarly disappointing young player.

We'll just have to see how things shake out. If we move Beasley, Okogie or even Nowell, then keeping Culver makes more sense, although it still might be best to deal him. Whether it's worth giving up a future 2nd rounder to clear Culver's salary from the books depends on who the Wolves would be able to sign as a free agent using that additional $6.5M in luxury tax space.

Excellent response Lip. It would have been interesting to know what the value around the league was last year for Culver. It think the problem with trying to trade him for a draft pick was they weren't going to trade him for another 2020 draft pick since they basically already had 3 of them. I think some teams may have been reluctant to give up a 2021 pick because teams are uncertain about what they would have given up. Plus giving up on Culver after 1 season which he didn't even get an offseason etc would have likely been tough to do. They were clearly excited about he was going to do this year but success didn't come. Maybe Rosas can hire David Kahn to help him move Culver for a future first round pick like he was able to do with a complicated draft day deal. Of course Kahn ended up botching that entire draft ending up with nobody remotely worthy of an NBA roster (I'll give him a pass on Derrick Williams) despite have multiple opportunities to do so (some nice players available at #20 and beyond) and I believe he then used the future pick to get rid of Wes Johnson although they did get some 2nds back in that deal.

Let me ask about Culver and Martin again. Would you rather have Martin for 1 year 1.7 million non-guaranteed or Culver for 1 year 6.5 million guaranteed? For some teams nearing the Lux tax (like the Wolves) the difference between those 2 salaries might actually mean 2 roster spots and so that means Kelan Martin and some other guy. That's 2 bites at the apple and probably both of them signed for 2 years instead of Culver for 1. This isn't meant to be a hair splitting thing but hopefully shows my point.

What I think we both absolutely agree on is every roster spot counts. It pained me to not have that 15th spot filled this year. They also spent much of the year without a 2nd 2-way guy. I understood why they didn't fill those spots and quite frankly that 2nd two-way spot was really understandable because the short g-league season but it would have been a free (in terms of cap space) way of getting a look at a player. Hopefully with things getting back to more normal the Wolves will get back to investing in the end of the roster again and see if that first year of finding worthwhile players was real or a mirage.

[Lipoli390]

Monster - Regarding whether I'd take Martin a $1.7M or Culver at $6.5M, my answer depends on the team. For the Wolves, I'd take Martin in a heartbeat based on the Wolves salary situation (close to the luxury tax threshold) and the fact that the Wolves are at a stage in their development where a player's ability to contribute positively now means more than long-term upside. I'd opt for Culver for a contending team looking for depth. However, for a team like the Pistons, Knicks, Rockets or Thunder that is early in its rebuilding processes, I'd opt for Culver. I'd also prefer Culver for the Spurs who are way under the salary cap and in need of high-caliber talent.

[Monster]

Monster - Regarding whether I'd take Martin a $1.7M or Culver at $6.5M, my answer depends on the team. For the Wolves, I'd take Martin in a heartbeat based on the Wolves salary situation (close to the luxury tax threshold) and the fact that the Wolves are at a stage in their development where a player's ability to contribute positively now means more than long-term upside. I'd opt for Culver for a contending team looking for depth. However, for a team like the Pistons, Knicks, Rockets or Thunder that is early in its rebuilding processes, I'd opt for Culver. I'd also prefer Culver for the Spurs who are way under the salary cap and in need of high-caliber talent.

Thanks for the response. I'm not sure if the Knicks agree they are in the early in the rebuilding process but I get what you mean. :) Personally I don't think Culver is a high end caliber talent anymore. I don't think you do either but you believe there are teams that still do think he might be or at least maybe high end complimentary player level talent. I hope you are right because ai would guess Rosas would jump at the chance to move him for any kind of value or be able to have financial flexibility to make some other move.

Also this is a little random but I was thinking more about the Wolves decisions on the fringes and had another thought. I was frustrated when they let Cam Reynolds go I thought he had showed something and he was cheap. He has played in 5 NBA games since then (all this season) and hasn't shown anything particularly worthwhile. Meanwhile the Wolves found guys that have shown a lot more than that in Martin, McLaughlin and Reid. Not all their moves at the end of the roster worked out but those were encouraging. It looks like letting Cam Reynolds go was a solid decision. It's somewhat amazing he turned 26 this year it feels like he could be older. Lol

[Lipoli390]

Monster - Regarding whether I'd take Martin a $1.7M or Culver at $6.5M, my answer depends on the team. For the Wolves, I'd take Martin in a heartbeat based on the Wolves salary situation (close to the luxury tax threshold) and the fact that the Wolves are at a stage in their development where a player's ability to contribute positively now means more than long-term upside. I'd opt for Culver for a contending team looking for depth. However, for a team like the Pistons, Knicks, Rockets or Thunder that is early in its rebuilding processes, I'd opt for Culver. I'd also prefer Culver for the Spurs who are way under the salary cap and in need of high-caliber talent.

Thanks for the response. I'm not sure if the Knicks agree they are in the early in the rebuilding process but I get what you mean. :) Personally I don't think Culver is a high end caliber talent anymore. I don't think you do either but you believe there are teams that still do think he might be or at least maybe high end complimentary player level talent. I hope you are right because ai would guess Rosas would jump at the chance to move him for any kind of value or be able to have financial flexibility to make some other move.

Also this is a little random but I was thinking more about the Wolves decisions on the fringes and had another thought. I was frustrated when they let Cam Reynolds go I thought he had showed something and he was cheap. He has played in 5 NBA games since then (all this season) and hasn't shown anything particularly worthwhile. Meanwhile the Wolves found guys that have shown a lot more than that in Martin, McLaughlin and Reid. Not all their moves at the end of the roster worked out but those were encouraging. It looks like letting Cam Reynolds go was a solid decision. It's somewhat amazing he turned 26 this year it feels like he could be older. Lol

You could be right about the Knicks not viewing themselves as early in the rebuilding process. But they have a lot of room under the cap to take a flier on Culver based on his defense and upside. As for Culver's upside, I think he has more than Kelan Martin and some others who are actually better than him right now. He has an impressive combination of skill, length and athleticism. And he was a heck of a player as a college sophomore. Don't get me wrong, I'm not suggesting anything like star potential and you'll recall I didn't like the Culver pick in the first place. But I think Culver's issue is shooting and it's a big issue that has thus far stopped him from progressing towards his potential. Ultimately, you're right that I'm banking mainly on the perception of other NBA front offices that will see upside worthy of taking a $6.5M flier for the price of a future 2nd-round pick.

Like you, I'm pretty impressed by our front office decisions on the fringes, including Naz Reid, JMac and Kelan Martin. Letting Cam Reynolds go fits the category of good fringe decisions.

[Q12543 [enjin:6621299]]

I'm still struggling as to why you guys are still (somewhat) enamored by Kelan Martin. Yes, he did some nice things in Summer League and the G-League, but he was awful in his stint with our big league team. He was supposed to be a shooter and........wait for it.....shot 26% from 3 and 39% from the field overall in 31 games. He repeated the well-worn pattern we've seen time and again with guys that should shoot well in theory, but then don't once they don a Wolves uniform. Jaylen Nowell is the latest iteration of this particular curse.