Minnesota Sports Forum

I agree with the consensus of keeping Wiggins around.

Moving Teague is the next priority, and it really shouldn't be difficult. He's still a starting caliber PG and his contract has some value being a 19 mil expiring. For a team looking to clear cap space for next off season might be interested. We might even get a late 1st round or couple of 2nd for him as well. He will defiantly be easier to move come trade deadline if he's still on the team.

It will be hard to move Diengs contract, but not impossible. Maybe a trade like:

Dieng + 2020 1st round pick (lottery protected) + future 2nd to Cavs for JR Smith (15.7 mil expiring, however only 3.8 mil guaranteed)

KiwiMatt wrote:I agree with the consensus of keeping Wiggins around.

Moving Teague is the next priority, and it really shouldn't be difficult. He's still a starting caliber PG and his contract has some value being a 19 mil expiring. For a team looking to clear cap space for next off season might be interested. We might even get a late 1st round or couple of 2nd for him as well. He will defiantly be easier to move come trade deadline if he's still on the team.

It will be hard to move Diengs contract, but not impossible. Maybe a trade like:

Dieng + 2020 1st round pick (lottery protected) + future 2nd to Cavs for JR Smith (15.7 mil expiring, however only 3.8 mil guaranteed)

I wouldn't give up a first round pick to get rid of Gorgui's contract. While his contract is pretty big, it's not anything close to a max. Moreover, he can contribute positively on the court. His contract was a mistake, but the organization just needs to ride out the remaining years or at least take it to next summer when it will be a one-year expiring contract and easier to deal. First round picks are too valuable to give away in order to get rid of contracts.

The only way we could get something valuable in return for Teague would be trading him for a comparable player with an equally large contract, but with more years remaining on the deal. That would extend the cap impact beyond the one year remaining on Teague's contract. The better scenario would be finding a team that can absorb Teague's salary and that would like a veteran PG for a season either to help contend or teach younger players. We would probably have to provide a future 2nd round pick as inducement to take him, but I'd be fine with that.

lipoli390 wrote:

KiwiMatt wrote:I agree with the consensus of keeping Wiggins around.

Moving Teague is the next priority, and it really shouldn't be difficult. He's still a starting caliber PG and his contract has some value being a 19 mil expiring. For a team looking to clear cap space for next off season might be interested. We might even get a late 1st round or couple of 2nd for him as well. He will defiantly be easier to move come trade deadline if he's still on the team.

It will be hard to move Diengs contract, but not impossible. Maybe a trade like:

Dieng + 2020 1st round pick (lottery protected) + future 2nd to Cavs for JR Smith (15.7 mil expiring, however only 3.8 mil guaranteed)

I wouldn't give up a first round pick to get rid of Gorgui's contract. While his contract is pretty big, it's not anything close to a max. Moreover, he can contribute positively on the court. His contract was a mistake, but the organization just needs to ride out the remaining years or at least take it to next summer when it will be a one-year expiring contract and easier to deal. First round picks are too valuable to give away in order to get rid of contracts.

The only way we could get something valuable in return for Teague would be trading him for a comparable player with an equally large contract, but with more years remaining on the deal. That would extend the cap impact beyond the one year remaining on Teague's contract. The better scenario would be finding a team that can absorb Teague's salary and that would like a veteran PG for a season either to help contend or teach younger players. We would probably have to provide a future 2nd round pick as inducement to take him, but I'd be fine with that.

Agree with the main ideas of your response here, Lip. Where I disagree is the part where you wouldn't trade a first-round pick to get rid of Dieng's deal, however, I'm adding a situational clause to my personal stance. I actually would trade a first to dump Dieng if it is the remaining obstacle in our pursuit of D'Angelo Russell. That means that we've already lined up a trade to shed Teague's expiring contract for little compensation. I think that would be a big win for this franchise moving forward and that's while recognizing the value draft picks have, especially in trying to build your team. I think draft picks should be used however you see fit in order to obtain star caliber players -- whether that's by holding firm and drafting them straight out of college/overseas, or by dealing them to acquire proven talent (as we would be in this scenario).

If someone said all you had to do was trade a first-round pick and you could acquire a 23-year old All-Star at the position you're most weak at AND he just happens to be pretty good friends with your current franchise cornerstone, I think that's a move you should feel good about making. That is just my opinion though.

I'd be on the phone with Charlotte, Orlando and SacTown to off load Wiggy, crazier things have happened. And I'm sure Rosas is, just a matter of what we have to give up. Oh man the Thibs era was a disaster. The Gorgui, Teague and Wig contracts should get him banned from being on TV talking NBA, let alone ever working for a team. Yes I know the Teague one isn't terrible, but we got no where near 19 mil a year level of play out of him. I don't see any playoff bound team taking him. Mainly cause his style of play and the film on him the last two years.

lipoli390 wrote:

thedoper wrote:

lipoli390 wrote:

thedoper wrote:The Teague contract should be easy to move. The Gorgui one is going to hurt.

That's right. Ryan and his coaching staff need for focus on figuring out how to most effectively use Gorgui because he'll be around a while. Fortunately, Teague and more so Covington have trade value. And I haven't totally dismissed the possibility that Wiggins might have some positive trade value with a small number of teams.

I think Wiggins we may need to give some time. The rhetoric is a bit over the top because of last year's performance relative to the contract. The possibility I see with Gorgui is simply that the contract is shorter and cheaper. I'd burn a pick to get rid of him if it meant getting Russell.

Doper - I agree with you and KG4Ever on Wiggins. His value right now is about as low as it can go. So this is not time to sell. I'd like to see him one more season under one head coach hopefully using him in a more optimal way I'd like to see him one more season under one head coach hopefully using him in a more optimal way. I'm not optimistic that we'll see a significantly improved Wiggins, but I just don't see a reasonable deal for him materializing and I don't want to give up assets just to clear his contract from the payroll. He remains tremendously talented.

But what hasn't been tried yet with him? He's been everything from a 1st option lead guard under a player-friendly coach in Flip to a role playing wing under 2nd year drill seargant Thibs where Butler and KAT were the first two options. No matter what his role is, he's been a model of remarkably consistent mediocrity. He literally doesn't do one single thing at an above average rate other than take a lot of difficult shots.

I think we need to get rid of him simply for the fact I think its unhealthy for the overall team culture to have such an underperforming player that has done nothing but lose his entire pro career be one of the max players on the squad.

Camden wrote:

lipoli390 wrote:

KiwiMatt wrote:I agree with the consensus of keeping Wiggins around.

Moving Teague is the next priority, and it really shouldn't be difficult. He's still a starting caliber PG and his contract has some value being a 19 mil expiring. For a team looking to clear cap space for next off season might be interested. We might even get a late 1st round or couple of 2nd for him as well. He will defiantly be easier to move come trade deadline if he's still on the team.

It will be hard to move Diengs contract, but not impossible. Maybe a trade like:

Dieng + 2020 1st round pick (lottery protected) + future 2nd to Cavs for JR Smith (15.7 mil expiring, however only 3.8 mil guaranteed)

I wouldn't give up a first round pick to get rid of Gorgui's contract. While his contract is pretty big, it's not anything close to a max. Moreover, he can contribute positively on the court. His contract was a mistake, but the organization just needs to ride out the remaining years or at least take it to next summer when it will be a one-year expiring contract and easier to deal. First round picks are too valuable to give away in order to get rid of contracts.

The only way we could get something valuable in return for Teague would be trading him for a comparable player with an equally large contract, but with more years remaining on the deal. That would extend the cap impact beyond the one year remaining on Teague's contract. The better scenario would be finding a team that can absorb Teague's salary and that would like a veteran PG for a season either to help contend or teach younger players. We would probably have to provide a future 2nd round pick as inducement to take him, but I'd be fine with that.

Agree with the main ideas of your response here, Lip. Where I disagree is the part where you wouldn't trade a first-round pick to get rid of Dieng's deal, however, I'm adding a situational clause to my personal stance. I actually would trade a first to dump Dieng if it is the remaining obstacle in our pursuit of D'Angelo Russell. That means that we've already lined up a trade to shed Teague's expiring contract for little compensation. I think that would be a big win for this franchise moving forward and that's while recognizing the value draft picks have, especially in trying to build your team. I think draft picks should be used however you see fit in order to obtain star caliber players -- whether that's by holding firm and drafting them straight out of college/overseas, or by dealing them to acquire proven talent (as we would be in this scenario).

If someone said all you had to do was trade a first-round pick and you could acquire a 23-year old All-Star at the position you're most weak at AND he just happens to be pretty good friends with your current franchise cornerstone, I think that's a move you should feel good about making. That is just my opinion though.

Cam - I actually agree with you. My position should have been more nuanced. If we were certain that we would end up with Russell, then I'd be OK with giving up a future lottery-protected 1st to clear cap space, Gorgui included. The key is being certain that we would end up with Russell. Like you, I take a broader view of the value from 1st round picks. I see their primary value as an opportunity to find and then develop young talent. But I definitely see their secondary value as a potentially powerful trade asset to land an elite or potentially elite player in the League. The key is knowing that you will get that player and also not giving up too much in the process. Giving up a future lottery-protected 1st and a 2nd round pick to clear Teague and Gorgui off the books and get Russell is a deal the Wolves should not pass up if it's there.

And as you know, I have some serious misgivings about Russell, including his defense, past locker room issues and recent pot arrest/likely pot-smoking. That said, a 23 year old with his talent coming off a really impressive offseason like last year, is the kind of player this organization needs to go after right now. That's especially true given Russell's friendship with our best player and franchise centerpiece, KAT.

But unlike draft night, Rosas had better be absolutely certain he's going to get Russell before he gives up a future 1st round pick.

I'm a little nervous about going towards the wing league trend with such small guys. You look at the top teams who go that route and they're pretty much all 6'7-6'9 with great length 2-4. Warriors, Raptors, Bucks. They are tall and super long to go with that height. Their lack of size from a bulk perspective is just made up by pure length blocking all passing lanes and still being able to rebound the ball effectively. Meanwhile we're gonna have Okogie at 6'4 and Culver at 6'5 with shorter arms as two of our wings in that scenario. We're just gonna be even smaller than these other teams playing "small" and with one big the rebounding really falls on Covington and Wiggins to box out while KAT is the primary help defender. In theory the league is going this direction, but the teams doing it best really do have the best fitting personnel to makeup for the deficiencies a small ball lineup has in the NBA. Guys like Draymond, KD, Kawhi, Siakam, Giannis and Middleton are all big enough with super length to make it work as small ball bigs. I'm not sure we have that personnel to do this well. I guess we'll just have to see who else Rosas adds in the coming years.

OK. I've been down on Rosas. But here's the alternative positive analysis that gives him the benefit of the doubt. It goes like this:

1. Plan A: Garland. Rosas traded up to #6 to get Garland as his plan A. At the time he understandably thought getting Garland was likely given that the Cavs already have Sexton. Rosas might have thought we'd have to give up a little more - like a 2nd round pick - to the Cavs to get him. At the same time, Rosas knew getting Garland wasn't a lock and that Cleveland's price might be too steep. So Rosas had a Plan B.

2. Plan B: D. Russell. As we all know, it's been widely reported that the Wolves have been interested in pursuing D. Russell. He's an elite talent, plays a position of need, is young and is friends with our cornerstone player, KAT. I think Rosas clearly preferred to get Garland (if for no other reason than economics). And that explains why Rosas gave up Saric to take a shot at landing Garland. He was comfortable taking that shot because he preferred Garland and also because he had a scenario in mind to get Russell without Saric.

I'll speculate as well that Rosas considered Culver the ideal pick to pair with the acquisition of Russell -- a better fit than anyone he was likely to get at #11 -- for several reasons:

First, Culver has a solid pretty high floor to plug in right away with Russell and KAT. Culver's lack of upside (my view) doesn't matter as much if the Wolves acquire an elite player like Russell. My primary knock on Culver is his lack of upside. But I've acknowledged the prevailing view among pundits that Culver has a pretty high floor. If the Wolves bring in Russell, they will have gotten the other elite player they need to pair with KAT. That reduces the pressure to draft a high upside guy like Doumbouya and it makes a higher floor prospect like Culver more valuable to the Wolves.

Second, Culver can help compensate for Russell's defensive deficiencies. Russell's calling card is offense, but he has serious defensive issues. Culver's calling card is defense. So drafting Culver adds another potentially good defender to go with Okogie as wingmates for Russell.

Third, Culver looks like he might be a combo guard who can plan some point as well as wing. Russell is also more of a combo guard than a PG. So Culver offers some versatility that could blend well with Russell.

Now the only question is how Rosas will go about executing on his Plan B to acquire Russell. A number of us have speculated on various scenarios - salary dumps and sign-and-trade options. It's hard to know. But I think there's not doubt Teague will be traded as part of the deal. The other outgoing player will have to be Covington, Gorgui or Wiggins in order to clear the necessary cap space. It will be interesting to see which one goes. My guess is that Rosas would prefer to deal Wiggins, but will probably end up dealing Covington. Of course, having made that prediction, it will be Gorgui. :)

So there you have it. A look inside the brilliant mind of G. Rosas. How could I have been so wrong about him. :)

Q12543 wrote: He literally doesn't do one single thing at an above average rate other than take a lot of difficult shots and cash huge paychecks.

Agreed!

lipoli390 wrote:OK. I've been down on Rosas. But here's the alternative positive analysis that gives him the benefit of the doubt. It goes like this:

1. Plan A: Garland. Rosas traded up to #6 to get Garland as his plan A. At the time he understandably thought getting Garland was likely given that the Cavs already have Sexton. Rosas might have thought we'd have to give up a little more - like a 2nd round pick - to the Cavs to get him. At the same time, Rosas knew getting Garland wasn't a lock and that Cleveland's price might be too steep. So Rosas had a Plan B.

2. Plan B: D. Russell. As we all know, it's been widely reported that the Wolves have been interested in pursuing D. Russell. He's an elite talent, plays a position of need, is young and is friends with our cornerstone player, KAT. I think Rosas clearly preferred to get Garland (if for no other reason than economics). And that explains why Rosas gave up Saric to take a shot at landing Garland. He was comfortable taking that shot because he preferred Garland and also because he had a scenario in mind to get Russell without Saric.

I'll speculate as well that Rosas considered Culver the ideal pick to pair with the acquisition of Russell -- a better fit than anyone he was likely to get at #11 -- for several reasons:

First, Culver has a solid pretty high floor to plug in right away with Russell and KAT. Culver's lack of upside (my view) doesn't matter as much if the Wolves acquire an elite player like Russell. My primary knock on Culver is his lack of upside. But I've acknowledged the prevailing view among pundits that Culver has a pretty high floor. If the Wolves bring in Russell, they will have gotten the other elite player they need to pair with KAT. That reduces the pressure to draft a high upside guy like Doumbouya and it makes a higher floor prospect like Culver more valuable to the Wolves.

Second, Culver can help compensate for Russell's defensive deficiencies. Russell's calling card is offense, but he has serious defensive issues. Culver's calling card is defense. So drafting Culver adds another potentially good defender to go with Okogie as wingmates for Russell.

Third, Culver looks like he might be a combo guard who can plan some point as well as wing. Russell is also more of a combo guard than a PG. So Culver offers some versatility that could blend well with Russell.

Now the only question is how Rosas will go about executing on his Plan B to acquire Russell. A number of us have speculated on various scenarios - salary dumps and sign-and-trade options. It's hard to know. But I think there's not doubt Teague will be traded as part of the deal. The other outgoing player will have to be Covington, Gorgui or Wiggins in order to clear the necessary cap space. It will be interesting to see which one goes. My guess is that Rosas would prefer to deal Wiggins, but will probably end up dealing Covington. Of course, having made that prediction, it will be Gorgui. :)

So there you have it. A look inside the brilliant mind of G. Rosas. How could I have been so wrong about him. :)

Well thought out stuff Lip. I still think the path to Russell is a sign and trade. Gupta's ESPN trade machine hasn't turned over to the new year so I haven't been able to play around as much as I would like with sign and trade scenarios. That's smart by him otherwise we clearly could steal his thunder! Lol