kekgeek1 wrote:Free agent Kelly Oubre Jr. has agreed to a two-year, $26M-plus deal with the Charlotte Hornets, sources tell @TheAthletic @Stadium.
That must be good news for those who want to sign Lauri as Charlotte was rumored to be interested in him. I am not that big on Lauri as the Wolves don't need yet another poor defender and I certainly wouldn't give up a first round pick even with solid protection on it.
kekgeek1 wrote:Free agent Kelly Oubre Jr. has agreed to a two-year, $26M-plus deal with the Charlotte Hornets, sources tell @TheAthletic @Stadium.
That must be good news for those who want to sign Lauri as Charlotte was rumored to be interested in him. I am not that big on Lauri as the Wolves don't need yet another poor defender and I certainly wouldn't give up a first round pick even with solid protection on it.
Yep. Apparently Oubre is signing for 2 years, $26M ($13M per year). If we could get Markkanen for that price without giving up a first-round pick, then I'd be OK with it. Prince and two future 2nd round picks for Markkanen. That would be my best and final offer.
Q12543 wrote:The team was 16-20 after the all star break last year. It's not like they need multiple incredible strokes of luck to improve to a playoff team. But yeah, they still need their fair share of things to break in the right direction for them.
That 16-20 mark seems a bit inflated to me. The Wolves benefited by other teams taking them lightly. It wasn't uncommon for other teams to rest their stars against the Wolves or just think they could mail it in. Also, the Wolves played some teams down the stretch that were trying to lose. The Wolves have not had a good offseason and they will be dependent on internal player development. Cracking the top 8 in the West will be difficult for the Wolves. They might make the top ten as Houston, OKC and San Antonio are likely to tank and Sac is bad. The Wolves just have to surpass one more team to make 10th place. I think New Orleans could struggle and I'm not completely sold on Memphis, especially after they traded away Valanciunus.
16 - 20 = 36 - 46.
That's STILL not good enough. That doesn't make the play-in tournament for either conference last season.
It reminds me of 2016 when the Wolves won 4 of their last 5 and 7 of their last 12 against a bunch of teams with injured guys... and we were over the moon for the 2017 season.
The team went 31 - 51, a 2-game improvement.
Let's not exaggerate here. No one is over the moon and comparing a 36 game sample size to a 12 game sample size is a big difference. That 16-20 mark includes our fair share of missed games/injuries and we absolutely won games against teams clawing and scratching for playoff positioning.
I can be as big of a pessimist as anyone. My point is that we don't need a gazillion things to line up perfectly to make a run at a playoff spot. Yes, we need a couple things - better overall health and some internal improvement - to break our way, but I don't think it's total fantasy for someone to expect a .500-ish season out of this group. Now whether one is actually satisfied with that result is a different story. I would be. Others wouldn't be.
Q12543 wrote:The team was 16-20 after the all star break last year. It's not like they need multiple incredible strokes of luck to improve to a playoff team. But yeah, they still need their fair share of things to break in the right direction for them.
That 16-20 mark seems a bit inflated to me. The Wolves benefited by other teams taking them lightly. It wasn't uncommon for other teams to rest their stars against the Wolves or just think they could mail it in. Also, the Wolves played some teams down the stretch that were trying to lose. The Wolves have not had a good offseason and they will be dependent on internal player development. Cracking the top 8 in the West will be difficult for the Wolves. They might make the top ten as Houston, OKC and San Antonio are likely to tank and Sac is bad. The Wolves just have to surpass one more team to make 10th place. I think New Orleans could struggle and I'm not completely sold on Memphis, especially after they traded away Valanciunus.
16 - 20 = 36 - 46.
That's STILL not good enough. That doesn't make the play-in tournament for either conference last season.
It reminds me of 2016 when the Wolves won 4 of their last 5 and 7 of their last 12 against a bunch of teams with injured guys... and we were over the moon for the 2017 season.
The team went 31 - 51, a 2-game improvement.
Let's not exaggerate here. No one is over the moon and comparing a 36 game sample size to a 12 game sample size is a big difference. That 16-20 mark includes our fair share of missed games/injuries and we absolutely won games against teams clawing and scratching for playoff positioning.
I can be as big of a pessimist as anyone. My point is that we don't need a gazillion things to line up perfectly to make a run at a playoff spot. Yes, we need a couple things - better overall health and some internal improvement - to break our way, but I don't think it's total fantasy for someone to expect a .500-ish season out of this group. Now whether one is actually satisfied with that result is a different story. I would be. Others wouldn't be.
To be fair, I wasn't saying people were over the moon from last year's finish, only 2016. Last year wasn't even as good as 2016.
Maybe it was a bad comparison considering I think the Wolves can definitely follow up and win at a 44% (or even slightly higher) pace this season.
But 16 - 20 whether against good teams, bad teams, injured teams, etc... it's simply not good enough because it equates to a season 10 games below .500.
CoolBreeze44 wrote:10 teams make the playoffs, if we cant make that group I don't know how this season could be a success. We're pressed up against the tax line again, no excuse for not getting inside the top 10. If we can't, KAT and DLO are not the answer and we should hold a fire sale at the trade deadline. I mean no more reason to wait if we flounder again.
Cool I confess I forgot that it's a 10 team field now. I went back and looked a few years at the top 10 teams in the west and then who was 11th. In the last 10 years Utah had the best 11th place finishes with 38 and 39 wins. If I remember right the next highest were the Nuggets and the Wolves with 36 wins. I would say if the Wolves had a 38 or 39 win season that also results in not making the playoffs that COULD still be a season that moved in the right direction but it's also pretty unlikely to happen. So yeah Cool if the Wolves don't make the playoffs is pretty likely we are asking some tough questions...which could also include can ________stay healthy?
Source: Andre Iguodala -- a three-time Warriors champion and 2015 Finals MVP -- agreed to sign a deal to return to Golden State. The Brooklyn Nets were also a finalist.
Sundog60 wrote:Does anyone know when we might expect to hear about the Wolves and Vanderbilt? How might his deal be affected by this Markannen speculation?
Good question.
What the Wolves SHOULD do is sign Vanderbilt to an extension regardless of whether they acquire Markkanen. One problem Markkanen clearly doesn't address is our poor defense and rebounding, which means that Vanderbilt is just as valuable to the Wolves with Markkanen as they are without.
As for what might happen, it's hard to say with Rosas. One possibility is that Vanderbilt would be dealt to Chicago as part of the deal to deal to get Markkanen. I sure hope not. Another possibility is that the Wolves withdraw their qualifying offer, believing they no longer need Vanderbilt if Markkanen is on the team. I don't see the Wolves doing that since it would make no sense. My concern is that another team would swoop in with an offer that the Wolves would not be able to match without exceeding the luxury tax threshold because of the impact of Markkanen's salary.
My opinion is that the Timberwolves' front office is doing exactly what they should be doing with both of their restricted free agents. Minnesota likely offered them what they believed to be fair (team-friendly) contracts at the start of free agency and when both Jarred Vanderbilt and Jordan McLaughlin didn't agree to terms, they were thanked for their time and told to explore the free market with the knowledge that the Wolves have the power to match any offer they agree to. So far they haven't found a suitor, which might mean that their asking price is higher than they're perceived to be worth. Eventually, I see both players back with the Wolves next season on deals that we will likely find to be acceptable -- ie. their qualifying offers or terms closer to what was originally offered.
In my mind, Vanderbilt should be retained regardless of Minnesota's interest in Lauri Markkanen.
