thedoper wrote:Is the elephant in the room beyond the rosters themselves? We mention a max contract for a free agent and we're already worried about the luxury tax when we're nowhere near it. Our market and ownership will always be a factor that tips these discussions away from us. Why aren't we in the mix for Durant?
I'll take our roster and our potential easy over Boston even with their picks. But we already got Ricky putting conditions on his commitment to the team, and it's almost a given that we wont target Horford or Durant. And because of the financial implications 4 years from now when we will be theoretically in a new CBA.
I think this is a great question. Why aren't we? It's almost universally acknowledged that the Wolves have the best young core in basketball. Why wouldn't Durant be attracted to our team? I think it comes down to two things, neither particularly encouraging:
1) The Twin Cities market. With it's mid-size and weather, is our market still not attractive to big time free agents with options?
2) Our front office refuses to think big enough. I mean if #1 isn't the case, wouldn't it have to be this? KAT, Durant, and Wiggins would be plenty good enough to contend within 2 years. I'd hate to think we wouldn't inject ourselves into the discussion.
Q stated we might be too far away from contender status, and that could be but how long would it take?
I'm not sure Durant wants to playoff potty-train a bunch of young pups for the next two years when he could enter a situation that allows him to contend right NOW (which potentially includes staying on his current team, OKC, with Westbrook).
Boston has the assets and willingness to make moves to potentially put together a contend-now team that could be very appealing to Durant. I don't think he's as interested in a team that might contend in 2018 or 2019.
Now if you are willing to put Wiggins and our #5 pick on the block for a couple of big-time veteran players to support Durant and KAT, than yeah, we could be a very compelling destination for Durant. Are you willing to do that? I doubt Taylor is.
Boy you really don't think much of Wiggins. I think that's the primary difference in our way of thinking. I see KAT, Wig, Durant, and Rubio and I see contender next year.
A Cavs fan called into Adam Schein's talk show this morning complaining about the moves his team made over the last couple years. He went as far to say that had the Cavs kept Wiggins, they would have won the title last year. I don't agree with that, but the interesting thing is how highly thought of Wiggins is by non-Wolves fans.
thedoper wrote:Is the elephant in the room beyond the rosters themselves? We mention a max contract for a free agent and we're already worried about the luxury tax when we're nowhere near it. Our market and ownership will always be a factor that tips these discussions away from us. Why aren't we in the mix for Durant?
I'll take our roster and our potential easy over Boston even with their picks. But we already got Ricky putting conditions on his commitment to the team, and it's almost a given that we wont target Horford or Durant. And because of the financial implications 4 years from now when we will be theoretically in a new CBA.
I think this is a great question. Why aren't we? It's almost universally acknowledged that the Wolves have the best young core in basketball. Why wouldn't Durant be attracted to our team? I think it comes down to two things, neither particularly encouraging:
1) The Twin Cities market. With it's mid-size and weather, is our market still not attractive to big time free agents with options?
2) Our front office refuses to think big enough. I mean if #1 isn't the case, wouldn't it have to be this? KAT, Durant, and Wiggins would be plenty good enough to contend within 2 years. I'd hate to think we wouldn't inject ourselves into the discussion.
Q stated we might be too far away from contender status, and that could be but how long would it take?
I'm not sure Durant wants to playoff potty-train a bunch of young pups for the next two years when he could enter a situation that allows him to contend right NOW (which potentially includes staying on his current team, OKC, with Westbrook).
Boston has the assets and willingness to make moves to potentially put together a contend-now team that could be very appealing to Durant. I don't think he's as interested in a team that might contend in 2018 or 2019.
Now if you are willing to put Wiggins and our #5 pick on the block for a couple of big-time veteran players to support Durant and KAT, than yeah, we could be a very compelling destination for Durant. Are you willing to do that? I doubt Taylor is.
I think you're right that the roster would have to be tweaked. My point is that I doubt that is even being explored. If we were in a different market with different ownership all options would be explored right now. It bothers me that Durant seems to be a non-stater. I'd be willing to put Zach and the 5. No problem. If we came out of this offseason with Kat, Wiggins, Durant and a mix of vets where do I sign up?
LaVine, the #5 and what else?
To be fair, that's not remotely close to enough to even get OKC to pick up the phone.
thedoper wrote:Is the elephant in the room beyond the rosters themselves? We mention a max contract for a free agent and we're already worried about the luxury tax when we're nowhere near it. Our market and ownership will always be a factor that tips these discussions away from us. Why aren't we in the mix for Durant?
I'll take our roster and our potential easy over Boston even with their picks. But we already got Ricky putting conditions on his commitment to the team, and it's almost a given that we wont target Horford or Durant. And because of the financial implications 4 years from now when we will be theoretically in a new CBA.
I think this is a great question. Why aren't we? It's almost universally acknowledged that the Wolves have the best young core in basketball. Why wouldn't Durant be attracted to our team? I think it comes down to two things, neither particularly encouraging:
1) The Twin Cities market. With it's mid-size and weather, is our market still not attractive to big time free agents with options?
2) Our front office refuses to think big enough. I mean if #1 isn't the case, wouldn't it have to be this? KAT, Durant, and Wiggins would be plenty good enough to contend within 2 years. I'd hate to think we wouldn't inject ourselves into the discussion.
Q stated we might be too far away from contender status, and that could be but how long would it take?
I'm not sure Durant wants to playoff potty-train a bunch of young pups for the next two years when he could enter a situation that allows him to contend right NOW (which potentially includes staying on his current team, OKC, with Westbrook).
Boston has the assets and willingness to make moves to potentially put together a contend-now team that could be very appealing to Durant. I don't think he's as interested in a team that might contend in 2018 or 2019.
Now if you are willing to put Wiggins and our #5 pick on the block for a couple of big-time veteran players to support Durant and KAT, than yeah, we could be a very compelling destination for Durant. Are you willing to do that? I doubt Taylor is.
I think you're right that the roster would have to be tweaked. My point is that I doubt that is even being explored. If we were in a different market with different ownership all options would be explored right now. It bothers me that Durant seems to be a non-stater. I'd be willing to put Zach and the 5. No problem. If we came out of this offseason with Kat, Wiggins, Durant and a mix of vets where do I sign up?
LaVine, the #5 and what else?
To be fair, that's not remotely close to enough to even get OKC to pick up the phone.
Think that was in terms of getting a compatible veteran to go with Towns, Durant, and Wiggins on that completely hypothetical superteam.
thedoper wrote:Is the elephant in the room beyond the rosters themselves? We mention a max contract for a free agent and we're already worried about the luxury tax when we're nowhere near it. Our market and ownership will always be a factor that tips these discussions away from us. Why aren't we in the mix for Durant?
I'll take our roster and our potential easy over Boston even with their picks. But we already got Ricky putting conditions on his commitment to the team, and it's almost a given that we wont target Horford or Durant. And because of the financial implications 4 years from now when we will be theoretically in a new CBA.
I think this is a great question. Why aren't we? It's almost universally acknowledged that the Wolves have the best young core in basketball. Why wouldn't Durant be attracted to our team? I think it comes down to two things, neither particularly encouraging:
1) The Twin Cities market. With it's mid-size and weather, is our market still not attractive to big time free agents with options?
2) Our front office refuses to think big enough. I mean if #1 isn't the case, wouldn't it have to be this? KAT, Durant, and Wiggins would be plenty good enough to contend within 2 years. I'd hate to think we wouldn't inject ourselves into the discussion.
Q stated we might be too far away from contender status, and that could be but how long would it take?
I'm not sure Durant wants to playoff potty-train a bunch of young pups for the next two years when he could enter a situation that allows him to contend right NOW (which potentially includes staying on his current team, OKC, with Westbrook).
Boston has the assets and willingness to make moves to potentially put together a contend-now team that could be very appealing to Durant. I don't think he's as interested in a team that might contend in 2018 or 2019.
Now if you are willing to put Wiggins and our #5 pick on the block for a couple of big-time veteran players to support Durant and KAT, than yeah, we could be a very compelling destination for Durant. Are you willing to do that? I doubt Taylor is.
I think you're right that the roster would have to be tweaked. My point is that I doubt that is even being explored. If we were in a different market with different ownership all options would be explored right now. It bothers me that Durant seems to be a non-stater. I'd be willing to put Zach and the 5. No problem. If we came out of this offseason with Kat, Wiggins, Durant and a mix of vets where do I sign up?
LaVine, the #5 and what else?
To be fair, that's not remotely close to enough to even get OKC to pick up the phone.
Think that was in terms of getting a compatible veteran to go with Towns, Durant, and Wiggins on that completely hypothetical superteam.
Oh. Ok. Gotcha. My bad.
But I would then add that as noted, the Wolves aren't battle-tested. They're super young at key spots. Even with an all-time great like Durant, would they be able to transition into Finals contender in just one year?
Cleveland did it for the most part last season. But James dictated virtually everything and it was in the East. And at least Irving and Love had more NBA experience... even if it was on losing teams. Durant is in his prime, so I imagine a step back is not in the cards at this point. Especially if it meant leaving a top 5 team and millions of dollars on the table... by opting out now.
thedoper wrote:Is the elephant in the room beyond the rosters themselves? We mention a max contract for a free agent and we're already worried about the luxury tax when we're nowhere near it. Our market and ownership will always be a factor that tips these discussions away from us. Why aren't we in the mix for Durant?
I'll take our roster and our potential easy over Boston even with their picks. But we already got Ricky putting conditions on his commitment to the team, and it's almost a given that we wont target Horford or Durant. And because of the financial implications 4 years from now when we will be theoretically in a new CBA.
I think this is a great question. Why aren't we? It's almost universally acknowledged that the Wolves have the best young core in basketball. Why wouldn't Durant be attracted to our team? I think it comes down to two things, neither particularly encouraging:
1) The Twin Cities market. With it's mid-size and weather, is our market still not attractive to big time free agents with options?
2) Our front office refuses to think big enough. I mean if #1 isn't the case, wouldn't it have to be this? KAT, Durant, and Wiggins would be plenty good enough to contend within 2 years. I'd hate to think we wouldn't inject ourselves into the discussion.
Q stated we might be too far away from contender status, and that could be but how long would it take?
I'm not sure Durant wants to playoff potty-train a bunch of young pups for the next two years when he could enter a situation that allows him to contend right NOW (which potentially includes staying on his current team, OKC, with Westbrook).
Boston has the assets and willingness to make moves to potentially put together a contend-now team that could be very appealing to Durant. I don't think he's as interested in a team that might contend in 2018 or 2019.
Now if you are willing to put Wiggins and our #5 pick on the block for a couple of big-time veteran players to support Durant and KAT, than yeah, we could be a very compelling destination for Durant. Are you willing to do that? I doubt Taylor is.
Boy you really don't think much of Wiggins. I think that's the primary difference in our way of thinking. I see KAT, Wig, Durant, and Rubio and I see contender next year.
You are talking about a playoff roster that has exactly one player that has actually played in the playoffs.
Wiggins made strides last season - especially in the second half - but you along with a few others often conflate potential with current performance.
I think there are downsides and we are by no means a top tier destination for Durant, there is no way around that. I think the point should stand that we have already talked ourselves out of even having a chance without even trying to conceive of a scenario where it works. We all know the Lakers and Knicks will pitch with less promise on their rosters than either of us. Shouldn't we at least try to be creative?
thedoper wrote:I think there are downsides and we are by no means a top tier destination for Durant, there is no way around that. I think the point should stand that we have already talked ourselves out of even having a chance without even trying to conceive of a scenario where it works. We all know the Lakers and Knicks will pitch with less promise on their rosters than either of us. Shouldn't we at least try to be creative?
Well, first of all, when you say "we", do you mean us knuckleheads that have absolutely zero influence on the Wolves or do you literally mean Taylor/Thibs/Layden? Because we don't know what those guys are really thinking. Perhaps they are thinking bigger than we think.
I actually think your scenario of trading LaVine + #5 either in a package together or in two separate deals to bring on a significant vet or two is a viable option as part of a push to get Durant here.
thedoper wrote:I think there are downsides and we are by no means a top tier destination for Durant, there is no way around that. I think the point should stand that we have already talked ourselves out of even having a chance without even trying to conceive of a scenario where it works. We all know the Lakers and Knicks will pitch with less promise on their rosters than either of us. Shouldn't we at least try to be creative?
Well, first of all, when you say "we", do you mean us knuckleheads that have absolutely zero influence on the Wolves or do you literally mean Taylor/Thibs/Layden? Because we don't know what those guys are really thinking. Perhaps they are thinking bigger than we think.
I actually think your scenario of trading LaVine + #5 either in a package together or in two separate deals to bring on a significant vet or two is a viable option as part of a push to get Durant here.
I wouldn't trade Zach and 5 until Durant's name is signed on a 4 year contract with the Timberwolves.
thedoper wrote:I think there are downsides and we are by no means a top tier destination for Durant, there is no way around that. I think the point should stand that we have already talked ourselves out of even having a chance without even trying to conceive of a scenario where it works. We all know the Lakers and Knicks will pitch with less promise on their rosters than either of us. Shouldn't we at least try to be creative?
Well, first of all, when you say "we", do you mean us knuckleheads that have absolutely zero influence on the Wolves or do you literally mean Taylor/Thibs/Layden? Because we don't know what those guys are really thinking. Perhaps they are thinking bigger than we think.
I actually think your scenario of trading LaVine + #5 either in a package together or in two separate deals to bring on a significant vet or two is a viable option as part of a push to get Durant here.
I wouldn't trade Zach and 5 until Durant's name is signed on a 4 year contract with the Timberwolves.
Right, but that would absolutely need to be part of the agreement to sign that contract. He would need to know that whatever rookie we drafted + LaVine (and any other piece-parts necessary) would be moved to nab a veteran or two from a vetted list that he agreed to. It's no different than when LeBron joined Cleveland and it was pretty much a given that Wiggins would eventually be gone.
