Rubio Revisited

[Carlos Danger]

Monster, I think I understand your "not fretting" while at the same time complicated/conflicted views on Rubio. I think many of us feel that way. I know I do. I like rooting for the guy. And I still make fun of his terrible shooting at the same time. Like you, I'm not going to lose any sleep over if he's on the team next year or not. I'm just wondering if the value is better for the Wolves to let his contract run out so we have that cap space to sign a key player in another year. Or if there is more value in using him to match salaries in a trade as one of the options you suggest. I guess the answer is "it depends" on the trade and/or who they would sign with his money. I feel like their will be some major chances to next year's roster. Finch hasn't even put one of his players on this team yet. I'm sure he'll end up adding a player or two that he's had in the past. All coaches normally do that.

[Lipoli390]

Monster, I think I understand your "not fretting" while at the same time complicated/conflicted views on Rubio. I think many of us feel that way. I know I do. I like rooting for the guy. And I still make fun of his terrible shooting at the same time. Like you, I'm not going to lose any sleep over if he's on the team next year or not. I'm just wondering if the value is better for the Wolves to let his contract run out so we have that cap space to sign a key player in another year. Or if there is more value in using him to match salaries in a trade as one of the options you suggest. I guess the answer is "it depends" on the trade and/or who they would sign with his money. I feel like their will be some major chances to next year's roster. Finch hasn't even put one of his players on this team yet. I'm sure he'll end up adding a player or two that he's had in the past. All coaches normally do that.

Carlos - I think you expressed my thoughts perfectly. Earlier in the season, I was all about trading Ricky as were the majority of posters on this Board. But Rick's had two months of solid and steadily improving play. I'm also seeing his mentorship value and I agree with Q that he could be a particularly effective mentor for Bolmaro. That's why i started this thread to rethink our initial disappointment in Ricky who was clearly horrible the first couple months of the season. Right now, I still think Rosas should explore trade possibilities involving Ricky. But I no longer believe it's imperative that the Wolves move him. To the contrary, I see Ricky providing positive value as a member of the Wolves roster next season. I don't see him starting next season in terrible shape again.

[thedoper]

Its still 17 mil for a back up pg that has been completely ineffective as a back up. The only reason we are keeping him is that we cant get real value back until the deadline. Its was a bad acquisition, but like many have stated here, there are some positive reasons to keep him around. None of those reasons justify the 17 mil we are paying for what he brings.

[Lipoli390]

Its still 17 mil for a back up pg that has been completely ineffective as a back up. The only reason we are keeping him is that we cant get real value back until the deadline. Its was a bad acquisition, but like many have stated here, there are some positive reasons to keep him around. None of those reasons justify the 17 mil we are paying for what he brings.

Doper - On that point you're absolutely right. In spite of the positives, there's no justifying his $17 million salary. The only positive I can take from his contract is that it expires after next season, which should increase his trade value at next year's trade deadline.

[Monster]

Its still 17 mil for a back up pg that has been completely ineffective as a back up. The only reason we are keeping him is that we cant get real value back until the deadline. Its was a bad acquisition, but like many have stated here, there are some positive reasons to keep him around. None of those reasons justify the 17 mil we are paying for what he brings.

Doper - On that point you're absolutely right. In spite of the positives, there's no justifying his $17 million salary. The only positive I can take from his contract is that it expires after next season, which should increase his trade value at next year's trade deadline.

Its worth remembering we would have been paying James Johnson 15.7 million this year had we not done the trade. Has Rubio been more valuable this season than James Johnson (15.7 million this year) is or would have been? I'm a James Johnson fan but he doesn't look to have been amazing with either team he has played for this season. While the Wolves did need help at PF there was also a chunk of the season they needed more than just McLaughlin and other young players as the PG for the roster. I expected Rubio to be clearly the better player than James Johnson this year. For the first couple months that likely wasn't the case. Since then Rubio has been pretty solid then lately back to what we typically expect from him good and bad. Also if we really wanted a James Johnson type player we could have simply kept RHJ.

So let's see what happens next season if Rubio is on the roster to see what value (especially for his salary) he brings or if the Wolves are able to move him in some sort of deal. MAYBE next season he shows himself to be worth at least 10 million in salary. If he was even that good that would mean he is pretty valuable.

Just to be clear if I could chose between Rubio being off the roster and having 17.8 million more to spend elsewhere I would do it. When the trade was made I simply thought he would bring a lot more value this season than James Johnson to make up for some of the 17.8 salary for the final year of his deal instead of the expiring deal of James Johnson...if we even kept him. For all the love of position-less basketball and the modern game etc...we have seen a few times this season where teams have made deals that value legit NBA PGs that have flaws. There may be another team that wants to add Rubio to their roster. Let's remember he has seen as a value player every time he has switched teams. Utah Phoenix, Thunder (seems likely at least since the were able to move him for some value) and then the Wolves. I'm not saying Rubio has loads of value but it's not like nobody the last few years wanted the guy.

[Carlos Danger]

Good point on the James Johnson salary we would be paying. First time I've seen anyone note that.

I like using VORP to measure trades. Rubio just got his back to zero last night after being negative all year. James Johnson has .2 VORP.
McDaniels is negative .6 VORP.

So first year, I'd say we lost the trade since Rubio/McDaniels played below replacement level (technically making our team worse) while Johnson was (very) slightly above replacement. But at the time of the trade, I certainly would have expected more from Rubio (he had 1.5 VORP the year prior). Plus we got that guy in Europe. So, maybe next year the trade will swing in our favor.

[Monster]

Good point on the James Johnson salary we would be paying. First time I've seen anyone note that.

I like using VORP to measure trades. Rubio just got his back to zero last night after being negative all year. James Johnson has .2 VORP.
McDaniels is negative .6 VORP.

So first year, I'd say we lost the trade since Rubio/McDaniels played below replacement level (technically making our team worse) while Johnson was (very) slightly above replacement. But at the time of the trade, I certainly would have expected more from Rubio (he had 1.5 VORP the year prior). Plus we got that guy in Europe. So, maybe next year the trade will swing in our favor.

Regardless of the trade the Wolves were slated to draft 2 rookies with a pick at #15 and #33 so either way there would have been a rookie (or 2) making an impact one way or another to the team.

I tend to use 538's RAPTOR as my go to advanced stat to do a quick evaluation/starting point on guys. I don't feel super confident in any of these stats but I like that one because of gives you a offense and defense impact (similar to RPM) so I see a little more where they get their WAR from. Johnson is a significant negative according to their stats. I did notice looking back at his numbers he does have nice steal block numbers which is often valuable so the VORP might be more accurate. I also think it can be somewhat unfair comparing guys that have such different roles on teams as Rubio has started so many more games. Sure that means he may play with better players but he likely faces better players too. I'll note that Johnson has a negative VORP with the Pels where he has averaged more minutes.

[Carlos Danger]

Regardless of the trade the Wolves were slated to draft 2 rookies with a pick at #15 and #33 so either way there would have been a rookie (or 2) making an impact one way or another to the team.

I tend to use 538's RAPTOR as my go to advanced stat to do a quick evaluation/starting point on guys. I don't feel super confident in any of these stats but I like that one because of gives you a offense and defense impact (similar to RPM) so I see a little more where they get their WAR from. Johnson is a significant negative according to their stats. I did notice looking back at his numbers he does have nice steal block numbers which is often valuable so the VORP might be more accurate. I also think it can be somewhat unfair comparing guys that have such different roles on teams as Rubio has started so many more games. Sure that means he may play with better players but he likely faces better players too. I'll note that Johnson has a negative VORP with the Pels where he has averaged more minutes.

I'll have to check out 538 RAPTOR (never heard of it). I like it when people give sources for their data (BTW, I'm almost exclusively a Basketball Reference guy which is where I pull VORP). Regardless, none of this is an exact science. I like/use VORP because I've found it to be mostly accurate when evaluating overall performance/impact. But I realize everyone has their own personal favorite stat. And by now, we all know there will be exceptions, anomalies and outliers regardless of which stat we pick. This is just what I like to use.

You make a good point about the Wolves being slated to draft two rookies at 15 and 33. I was just presenting the face value of the overall VORP from that trade as of the first year. The reality is none of the guys involved moved the needle much one way or another. Also, the trade is hard to follow (at least via Basketball Reference). There are so many teams/players/picks involved, I probably botched it. But if they had kept their pick....who would they have taken in your opinion? Maybe that's the guy we should be comparing results to?

[Monster]

Regardless of the trade the Wolves were slated to draft 2 rookies with a pick at #15 and #33 so either way there would have been a rookie (or 2) making an impact one way or another to the team.

I tend to use 538's RAPTOR as my go to advanced stat to do a quick evaluation/starting point on guys. I don't feel super confident in any of these stats but I like that one because of gives you a offense and defense impact (similar to RPM) so I see a little more where they get their WAR from. Johnson is a significant negative according to their stats. I did notice looking back at his numbers he does have nice steal block numbers which is often valuable so the VORP might be more accurate. I also think it can be somewhat unfair comparing guys that have such different roles on teams as Rubio has started so many more games. Sure that means he may play with better players but he likely faces better players too. I'll note that Johnson has a negative VORP with the Pels where he has averaged more minutes.

I'll have to check out 538 RAPTOR (never heard of it). I like it when people give sources for their data (BTW, I'm almost exclusively a Basketball Reference guy which is where I pull VORP). Regardless, none of this is an exact science. I like/use VORP because I've found it to be mostly accurate when evaluating overall performance/impact. But I realize everyone has their own personal favorite stat. And by now, we all know there will be exceptions, anomalies and outliers regardless of which stat we pick. This is just what I like to use.

You make a good point about the Wolves being slated to draft two rookies at 15 and 33. I was just presenting the face value of the overall VORP from that trade as of the first year. The reality is none of the guys involved moved the needle much one way or another. Also, the trade is hard to follow (at least via Basketball Reference). There are so many teams/players/picks involved, I probably botched it. But if they had kept their pick....who would they have taken in your opinion? Maybe that's the guy we should be comparing results to?

It wasn't a universal consensus of the board but a lot of people wanted Shaddiq Bey at #15 which according to VORP he was a positive and on RAPTOR he is pretty much equal to McDaniels. I think the main doffeeence between the 2 guys just in terms of stats is Bey takes and makes a lot more 3's scoring lore points which is obviously valuable. Bey doesn't exactly play with a lot of scoring threats so his shooting is needed. I wonder what McDaniels might do given more opportunities. I liked Bey in the draft but I ended up being a big fan of McDaniels after watching some college games of him. I think he is a really nice player and a nice young talent with a variety of ways to become a pretty valuable player. Bey is probably a more finished product.

At #33 there are so many options who knows what we would have done. I mean Bolmaro was actually the higher pick of The 2 guys but I think McDaniels is a more comparable player to Bey. I think Desmond Bane may have been the guy I wanted there were people that were big Paul Reed fans (I think that was his name) and he went at the end of the 2nd round. It would have been a little wild to basically add 3 wings to the roster (Bey could play PF) when we already had a lot of perimeter guys. At this point the Bolmaro pick actually looks pretty good. The Knicks picked Quickly which I remember the draft coverage thought it was a reach and he has been good for them.

Really the only thing you didn't mention in the trade was I believe the Wolves threw in a future 2nd round pick which obviously has no impact on this season.