Minnesota Sports Forum

Posted: **Tue Nov 17, 2020 12:25 pm**

I did some reading about Gordon and one of the articles had takes from people around the league that work for NBA teams. A number of them considered Gordon to be a good defender and another theme that came up was they thought if Gordon went somewhere that he had to do less he would become much more valuable. Basically The idea was if he is more of a 4th best player type then that would suit him better. Every player has risk and reward. He wouldn't be the first player to improve in his mid 20's...I mean a james Johnson took a while to be a good rotation player Gordon is already there and has been for years. He turned 25 a few weeks ago.

Posted: **Tue Nov 17, 2020 12:27 pm**

Camden wrote:
Q12543 wrote:
SameOldNudityDrew wrote:I know it's not real, but . . .

Am I crazy for liking Johnson more than Gordon straight up?

Yes, a little. You need to peel back the onion on these guys a bit. Gordon is a legit full-time starting player whereas Johnson has almost always been used primarily off the bench. And given Johnson's age, it's highly likely his ability to continue playing at a productive level will require even fewer minutes going forward.

The other thing to look at are some of those second-tier stats like assist to turnover ratio and foul rate. Johnson is worse on both fronts, which suggests to me that he isn't always the greatest decision maker. It's a little ironic since he is supposedly the more savvy vet than Gordon, but I'd argue that Gordon is probably the more intelligent player. We saw some of Johnson's more careless turnovers in the brief stint he played for us last year.

And lastly, Gordon is actually in the same age window as DLO and KAT. He could still conceivably improve.

I'm also a bit "meh" on Gordon, but when people compare him to Johnson, I do believe he is the better player and the better fit of the two.

I agree with all of what Q said here. Aaron Gordon is better than James Johnson. However, I would be unwilling to part with the 17th overall pick for Gordon. I would rather roll with Johnson and take a swing on a prospect that could potentially be better than Gordon. I know kek and probably others disagree, but that's where I'm at.

Now, if the Wolves were to swap top-three picks with Charlotte and pick up Miles Bridges and the 32nd pick in the process like John Hollinger suggests, and then trade 32, 33, and Johnson for Gordon... I could get behind that perhaps.

The odds of the 17th pick being as good as Gordon are not great. And I don't want to wait three years (and read so much online chatter trying to convince ourselves of something that isn't happening).

For me the rub is whether he's worth the price. $34M over two years. It's not great. And he's unlikely to get better and fully earn it. But would it help us avoid simply overpaying somewhere else anyway? A cynical view of the Wolves... but it's also well-earned.

Posted: **Tue Nov 17, 2020 12:30 pm**

Hicks123 wrote:I did some reading about Gordon and one of the articles had takes from people around the league that work for NBA teams. A number of them considered Gordon to be a good defender and another theme that came up was they thought if Gordon went somewhere that he had to do less he would become much more valuable. Basically The idea was if he is more of a 4th best player type then that would suit him better. Every player has risk and reward. He wouldn't be the first player to improve in his mid 20's...I mean a james Johnson took a while to be a good rotation player Gordon is already there and has been for years. He turned 25 a few weeks ago.

These are great points. Not every player is built to be a focal point. Take a guy like Covington. Everyone LOVES his play, and I think it would be a resounding YES from this whole board on adding him back to the T-Wolves starting lineup. That said, force him into a primary contributor role, and his shine wears off. He has a LOT of limitations as a primary player, but excels as a secondary contributor. Gordon is likely similar. Regarding salary, his salary declines yearly, so that is a plus. He may be overpaid, but not grossly so.

I love the deal of Johnson/17, as he certainly makes this team much better the next several seasons. He is young, athletic, and a supposed solid defender. Can certainly help our tempo as I believe he is very strong at fast-break basketball. We are NOT going to sniff another free agent of his caliber.

And while I like many guys at 17, there is just a harsh historical reality that guys picked around this spot are 50/50 that they are even contributing players. Certainly you can hit on players, but Gordon would be the best case (plus some) we could ever hope for from pick 17.

Posted: **Tue Nov 17, 2020 12:31 pm**

#17 for Gordon is a good value move IMO. Like Abe said the odds of #17 bringing something better are relatively small. I think Gordon would flourish some here, not as a star, but as a good starter and role player.

Posted: **Tue Nov 17, 2020 12:51 pm**

If Aaron Gordon was better than average, then I'd be inclined to agree with the thought process of getting the sure thing. In this case, though, I just don't see it. The team doesn't get considerably better with Gordon and they lose a valuable dart throw at a guy that could potentially be much better than Gordon.

This board especially likes to talk about the "what if's" when it comes to players that were taken after the Wolves drafted. The Giannis Antetokounmpo, Rudy Gobert, OG Anunoby, Michael Porter, Tyler Herro type picks don't happen if you trade them away for just okay starters. And that's what Gordon is. He's not great. He's not bad. He's okay.

Posted: **Tue Nov 17, 2020 1:05 pm**

Camden wrote:If Aaron Gordon was better than average, then I'd be inclined to agree with the thought process of getting the sure thing. In this case, though, I just don't see it. The team doesn't get considerably better with Gordon and they lose a valuable dart throw at a guy that could potentially be much better than Gordon.

This board especially likes to talk about the "what if's" when it comes to players that were taken after the Wolves drafted. The Giannis Antetokounmpo, Rudy Gobert, OG Anunoby, Michael Porter, Tyler Herro type picks don't happen if you trade them away for just okay starters. And that's what Gordon is. He's not great. He's not bad. He's okay.

Just for fun, to show how poorly the Wolves have drafted... who's the best player they drafted #17 or lower?

- Josh Okogie?
- Rasho Nesterovich?
- Nikola Pekovic?
- Doug West?

I'm not suggesting it's possible. Nor that Gordon is much better than a decent starter. Only that the Wolves have sucked balls drafting over the past 31 years.

Posted: **Tue Nov 17, 2020 1:19 pm**

AbeVigodaLive wrote:
Camden wrote:If Aaron Gordon was better than average, then I'd be inclined to agree with the thought process of getting the sure thing. In this case, though, I just don't see it. The team doesn't get considerably better with Gordon and they lose a valuable dart throw at a guy that could potentially be much better than Gordon.

This board especially likes to talk about the "what if's" when it comes to players that were taken after the Wolves drafted. The Giannis Antetokounmpo, Rudy Gobert, OG Anunoby, Michael Porter, Tyler Herro type picks don't happen if you trade them away for just okay starters. And that's what Gordon is. He's not great. He's not bad. He's okay.

Just for fun, to show how poorly the Wolves have drafted... who's the best player they drafted #17 or lower?

- Josh Okogie?
- Rasho Nesterovich?
- Nikola Pekovic?
- Doug West?

I'm not suggesting it's possible. Nor that Gordon is much better than a decent starter. Only that the Wolves have sucked balls drafting over the past 31 years.

We could also create a pretty long list of players substantially better than Aaron Gordon that were taken 17th or later. There are valid points on both sides of this one. I just don't think Gordon is good enough for me to get rid of one of those lottery ticket type picks. I'd roll the dice and push forward with James Johnson, Juan Hernangomez, Jarred Vanderbilt, a free agent pickup, etc.

Posted: **Tue Nov 17, 2020 1:38 pm**

Camden wrote:
AbeVigodaLive wrote:
Camden wrote:If Aaron Gordon was better than average, then I'd be inclined to agree with the thought process of getting the sure thing. In this case, though, I just don't see it. The team doesn't get considerably better with Gordon and they lose a valuable dart throw at a guy that could potentially be much better than Gordon.

This board especially likes to talk about the "what if's" when it comes to players that were taken after the Wolves drafted. The Giannis Antetokounmpo, Rudy Gobert, OG Anunoby, Michael Porter, Tyler Herro type picks don't happen if you trade them away for just okay starters. And that's what Gordon is. He's not great. He's not bad. He's okay.

Just for fun, to show how poorly the Wolves have drafted... who's the best player they drafted #17 or lower?

- Josh Okogie?
- Rasho Nesterovich?
- Nikola Pekovic?
- Doug West?

I'm not suggesting it's possible. Nor that Gordon is much better than a decent starter. Only that the Wolves have sucked balls drafting over the past 31 years.

We could also create a pretty long list of players substantially better than Aaron Gordon that were taken 17th or later. There are valid points on both sides of this one. I just don't think Gordon is good enough for me to get rid of one of those lottery ticket type picks. I'd roll the dice and push forward with James Johnson, Juan Hernangomez, Jarred Vanderbilt, a free agent pickup, etc.

I want to say even though I disagree with you on Gordon and the value of the #17th pick I see where you are coming from. If the Wolves didn't have the #1 pick or a pick higher then #17 I would be more hesitant to make the trade for Gordon.

I think the Wolves need another elite player and that could be the #17 but that is super unlikely. I also think the Wolves need to start winning because the timeline of Kat and Dlo is coming.

Here are the last 20 #17 overall picks

2019 Nickeil Alexander-Walker, Virginia Tech - New Orleans Pelicans
2018 Donte DiVincenzo, Villanova - Milwaukee Bucks
2017 D.J. Wilson, Michigan - Milwaukee Bucks
2016 Wade Baldwin, Vanderbilt - Memphis Grizzlies
2015 Rashad Vaughn, UNLV - Milwaukee Bucks
2014 James Young, Kentucky - Boston Celtics
2013 Dennis Schroeder, Germany - Atlanta Hawks
2012 Tyler Zeller, UNC - Dallas Mavericks
2011 Iman Shumpert, Georgia Tech - New York Knicks
2010 Kevin Seraphin, France - Chicago Bulls

2000's

2009 Jrue Holiday, UCLA - Philadelphia 76ers
2008 Roy Hibbert, Georgetown - Toronto Raptors
2007 Sean Williams, Boston College - New Jersey Nets
2006 Shawne Williams, Memphis - Indiana Pacers
2005 Danny Granger, New Mexico - Indiana Pacers
2004 Josh Smith, Oak Hill Academy H.S. VA - Atlanta Hawks
2003 Zarko Cabarkapa, Serbia & Montenegro - Phoenix Suns
2002 Juan Dixon, Maryland - Washington Wizards
2001 Michael Bradley, Villanova - Toronto Raptors
2000 Desmond Mason, Oklahoma State - Seattle Supersonics

Only 2 players are for sure better then Gordon in Jrue Holiday and Danny Granger and then I think you have 3 arguments in Josh Smith, Roy Hibbert and Dennis Schroeder.

So you have a 10% chance of landing a better player, 25% of landing a better player or similar player as Gordon and 75% chance the player is worse using data from the last 20 years.

I understand you point Cam, I just think the Wolves need to keep adding for sure quality NBA starting players, especially when the Wolves get a chance to add a star with the #1 overall pick.

Posted: **Tue Nov 17, 2020 1:44 pm**

I am actually surprised at the lack of interest from the board on this Gordon deal.

Bucks praised on board for Bogdanivich.
Portland praised on this board for Cov.
LA praised on this board for Schroeder

Those guys are no better/more valuable than Gordon. I would classify them as similar impact players. I am also on record saying I would take any of those guys if we are only giving up pick 17. I dig potential, and believe in building through draft. But I also realize that attaining an "average to slightly above average starter" for a draft pick in the teens is not simple to attain. Especially one yet to hit his prime years.

I can see both sides, I just happen to fall on side of sure thing. If that was our ONLY pick, I may want to spin the roulette wheel.

Posted: **Tue Nov 17, 2020 1:47 pm**

kekgeek1 wrote:
Camden wrote:
AbeVigodaLive wrote:
Camden wrote:If Aaron Gordon was better than average, then I'd be inclined to agree with the thought process of getting the sure thing. In this case, though, I just don't see it. The team doesn't get considerably better with Gordon and they lose a valuable dart throw at a guy that could potentially be much better than Gordon.

This board especially likes to talk about the "what if's" when it comes to players that were taken after the Wolves drafted. The Giannis Antetokounmpo, Rudy Gobert, OG Anunoby, Michael Porter, Tyler Herro type picks don't happen if you trade them away for just okay starters. And that's what Gordon is. He's not great. He's not bad. He's okay.

Just for fun, to show how poorly the Wolves have drafted... who's the best player they drafted #17 or lower?

- Josh Okogie?
- Rasho Nesterovich?
- Nikola Pekovic?
- Doug West?

I'm not suggesting it's possible. Nor that Gordon is much better than a decent starter. Only that the Wolves have sucked balls drafting over the past 31 years.

We could also create a pretty long list of players substantially better than Aaron Gordon that were taken 17th or later. There are valid points on both sides of this one. I just don't think Gordon is good enough for me to get rid of one of those lottery ticket type picks. I'd roll the dice and push forward with James Johnson, Juan Hernangomez, Jarred Vanderbilt, a free agent pickup, etc.

I want to say even though I disagree with you on Gordon and the value of the #17th pick I see where you are coming from. If the Wolves didn't have the #1 pick or a pick higher then #17 I would be more hesitant to make the trade for Gordon.

I think the Wolves need another elite player and that could be the #17 but that is super unlikely. I also think the Wolves need to start winning because the timeline of Kat and Dlo is coming.

Here are the last 20 #17 overall picks

2019 Nickeil Alexander-Walker, Virginia Tech - New Orleans Pelicans
2018 Donte DiVincenzo, Villanova - Milwaukee Bucks
2017 D.J. Wilson, Michigan - Milwaukee Bucks
2016 Wade Baldwin, Vanderbilt - Memphis Grizzlies
2015 Rashad Vaughn, UNLV - Milwaukee Bucks
2014 James Young, Kentucky - Boston Celtics
2013 Dennis Schroeder, Germany - Atlanta Hawks
2012 Tyler Zeller, UNC - Dallas Mavericks
2011 Iman Shumpert, Georgia Tech - New York Knicks
2010 Kevin Seraphin, France - Chicago Bulls

2000's

2009 Jrue Holiday, UCLA - Philadelphia 76ers
2008 Roy Hibbert, Georgetown - Toronto Raptors
2007 Sean Williams, Boston College - New Jersey Nets
2006 Shawne Williams, Memphis - Indiana Pacers
2005 Danny Granger, New Mexico - Indiana Pacers
2004 Josh Smith, Oak Hill Academy H.S. VA - Atlanta Hawks
2003 Zarko Cabarkapa, Serbia & Montenegro - Phoenix Suns
2002 Juan Dixon, Maryland - Washington Wizards
2001 Michael Bradley, Villanova - Toronto Raptors
2000 Desmond Mason, Oklahoma State - Seattle Supersonics

Only 2 players are for sure better then Gordon in Jrue Holiday and Danny Granger and then I think you have 3 arguments in Josh Smith, Roy Hibbert and Dennis Schroeder.

So you have a 10% chance of landing a better player, 25% of landing a better player or similar player as Gordon and 75% chance the player is worse using data from the last 20 years.

I understand you point Cam, I just think the Wolves need to keep adding for sure quality NBA starting players, especially when the Wolves get a chance to add a star with the #1 overall pick.

It seems like we're always searching for a potential star player... on some specific timeline... the best fit... a good contract... et al.

More often than not... the Wolves have been unable to even put a respectable team on the floor.

I don't know what the answer is. But I'm all in on being respectable. Or, even not a laughingstock. Or, even not the worst franchise in NBA history.

Baby steps. As we've said before... Towns (#1), Russell (#2) and the #1 pick this year are the ones vying for the biggest piece of the proverbial pie. It's impossible to have 5 guys all going in grabbing for it. If one (two or three) of those guys are incapable of getting it down... whether or not the Wolves kept the #17 pick or grabbed Gordon is almost entirely irrelevant.

ALMOST every time, the #17 is a move on the margins. Getting Gordon is a move on the margins. You just hope enough of those land in your favor to complement the stars.

Minnesota Sports Forum

Wolves acquire Gordon

Re: Wolves acquire Gordon

Re: Wolves acquire Gordon

Re: Wolves acquire Gordon

Re: Wolves acquire Gordon

Re: Wolves acquire Gordon

Re: Wolves acquire Gordon

Re: Wolves acquire Gordon

Re: Wolves acquire Gordon

Re: Wolves acquire Gordon

Re: Wolves acquire Gordon