Minnesota Sports Forum

longstrangetrip wrote:I side with Future and Q on Barnes. While I like his improved defense, his offense seems to come mostly from ridiculously open jumpers due to his teammates attracting so much attention. He's already turned down $16 million for 4 years from the warriors, so you know he thinks he can be close to a max player. This club doesn't need to pay $20 million+ to another player 3-6 years short of his prime...what they need is vets who can balance out the roster and, yes, "mentor" our terrific young core.

Barnes and the coaching staff joke about his inability to operate in a pick and roll offense...he's completely inept. If you're the warriors and you can carve out a very useful role for Barnes outside PnR, you can afford to joke about this. But I don't think other teams would find it so funny. I don't see him as a good fit here at all, and if Barnes is smart, he'll take the $18 million he can probably get from the Warriors and continue to be successful and win championships. He seems like a smart guy, so if the Warriors decide they want him, I think he stays there.

I get what you are saying about his ability to do more. There was on example of what you are saying of his ability out of the pick and roll just last game against the Rockets. He had a good lane to attack and sort of fumbled the ball around and was basically lucky to just retain the possession. It was ugly. All that said the appeal is he is about to turn 24. It's not like he is going to magically turn into a superstar player but that's still pretty young AND he has plenty of vet experience. Over 300 career games and has played in 44 playoff games. Like I said there is downside to every player on the list. They are all a gamble of some sort. I would think if Barnes wants to get paid he will go somewhere that he is more likely to also be something closer to the guy than possibly 4th banana here.

The problem I have with waiting to reel in a big fish in free agency, like some of you have proposed, is that not only do we not know who will be available next year or years after that, but our cap flexibility is arguably the best it will be right now. All of our young guys are on rookie deals still. We only have two sizable contracts in Rubio and Pek and even those are a drop in the bucket compared to the upped salary cap. This is the time to strike. Next year, we will probably be re-signing Dieng and Muhammad, so you can probably forget about adding a big time player then because between the both of them they could cost 25 million. Only a year after that, we'll be handing out new deals to Wiggins and LaVine. So, there is no better time than now as far as I'm concerned. We're ready to start winning and getting playoff experience for the young guys. What are accomplishing by putting it off? Be aggressive. Go get some serious help for them.

Camden wrote:The problem I have with waiting to reel in a big fish in free agency, like some of you have proposed, is that not only do we not know who will be available next year or years after that, but our cap flexibility is arguably the best it will be right now. All of our young guys are on rookie deals still. We only have two sizable contracts in Rubio and Pek and even those are a drop in the bucket compared to the upped salary cap. This is the time to strike. Next year, we will probably be re-signing Dieng and Muhammad, so you can probably forget about adding a big time player then because between the both of them they could cost 25 million. Only a year after that, we'll be handing out new deals to Wiggins and LaVine. So, there is no better time than now as far as I'm concerned. We're ready to start winning and getting playoff experience for the young guys. What are accomplishing by putting it off? Be aggressive. Go get some serious help for them.

I agree completely. The cap may continue to go up too. Meaning if we really were facing a choice next year between Dieng, Muhammad, and more vets we could still have potential flexibility there. When you have a window you take it. With injuries and uncertainty it is best to always show your players and fans that you are always committed to winning. Horford is a great insurance possibility and he fits the biggest hole in our roster which is the 4.

Cam, your argument that the Wolves will likely not be in as good a position in future summers as this summer to lure a big fish is valid. The problem is: what happens in 3-4 years when our big three demand their max or near max contracts? Yes, the salary cap is going up, but max contracts also go up proportionally (25-30% of the cap), and 4 max or near max players will put the Wolves well over the luxury tax...and Glen and his ownership group don't want that. Do the math:

Horford: 30% of the cap
Wig and KAT: each 25% of the cap (because they will not be 8-year players)
LaVine: say, no max but still 20% of the cap

That's 100% of the cap spent on 4 out of 15 players! Add in Rubio and Gorgui, maybe Shabazz, Belly, and a bunch of role players who also need to get paid, and the Wolves will be in a terrible luxury tax predicament.

Now, you may be saying "Glen is a billionaire...he's not going to worry about a luxury tax if he can win a championship or two". I think that's partially right, but even a billionaire is going to try to avoid such an onerous tax (look it up to see how awful it can be).

But the real issue is Glen's minority owners. After two more came on board last week (I believe this is now public information) at 15-20%, that leaves them at 5 relatively significant minority owners representing over a third of the ownership (Debbie Saunders has decided to not sell Flip's interest). While the minority owners are also wealthy, they aren't "Glen wealthy", and they are not going to be on board with any luxury tax. Luxury tax puts the Wolves into a serious cash flow situation, and would certainly lead to capital call from all owners, and everyone (including Glen) would have to visit their banker to cover a capital call. You might argue: "Big deal...so they borrow a little more now. They get it all back when they eventually sell". But it's not that easy. I can assure you that it is a scary thing for these minority owners to borrow more, when they recognize that at any time an impulsive and stubborn ownership or player group can decide to strike...and a long-term strike could significantly impact the value of these franchises. Who knows...Glen maybe even had to make some assurances to the now owners who joined the group last week that the team would never get into a luxury tax situation, and thus it would be unlikely that there will be any future capital calls.

Thibs/Leyden may want to bring on a max deal this summer as part of a win-now strategy, but no deals can happen without Glen signing off. And I think Glen's focus will be on keeping his powder dry enough to be able to sign his three studs at the end of their rookie deals if they reach their ceilngs...without having to play luxury tax.

Barnes would never want to come to Minnesota, because he will get fewer shots here than he does in GS. He will only leave GS if they sign Durant. If they do, he will go somewhere that needs a 3 and D wing and take a boatload of money to do so.

Without Wiggins, he would be a nice fit. I would rather have Batum for a cheaper price and better shooter.

longstrangetrip wrote:Cam, your argument that the Wolves will likely not be in as good a position in future summers as this summer to lure a big fish is valid. The problem is: what happens in 3-4 years when our big three demand their max or near max contracts? Yes, the salary cap is going up, but max contracts also go up proportionally (25-30% of the cap), and 4 max or near max players will put the Wolves well over the luxury tax...and Glen and his ownership group don't want that. Do the math:

Horford: 30% of the cap
Wig and KAT: each 25% of the cap (because they will not be 8-year players)
LaVine: say, no max but still 20% of the cap

That's 100% of the cap spent on 4 out of 15 players! Add in Rubio and Gorgui, maybe Shabazz, Belly, and a bunch of role players who also need to get paid, and the Wolves will be in a terrible luxury tax predicament.

Now, you may be saying "Glen is a billionaire...he's not going to worry about a luxury tax if he can win a championship or two". I think that's partially right, but even a billionaire is going to try to avoid such an onerous tax (look it up to see how awful it can be).

But the real issue is Glen's minority owners. After two more came on board last week (I believe this is now public information) at 15-20%, that leaves them at 5 relatively significant minority owners representing over a third of the ownership (Debbie Saunders has decided to not sell Flip's interest). While the minority owners are also wealthy, they aren't "Glen wealthy", and they are not going to be on board with any luxury tax. Luxury tax puts the Wolves into a serious cash flow situation, and would certainly lead to capital call from all owners, and everyone (including Glen) would have to visit their banker to cover a capital call. You might argue: "Big deal...so they borrow a little more now. They get it all back when they eventually sell". But it's not that easy. I can assure you that it is a scary thing for these minority owners to borrow more, when they recognize that at any time an impulsive and stubborn ownership or player group can decide to strike...and a long-term strike could significantly impact the value of these franchises. Who knows...Glen maybe even had to make some assurances to the now owners who joined the group last week that the team would never get into a luxury tax situation, and thus it would be unlikely that there will be any future capital calls.

Thibs/Leyden may want to bring on a max deal this summer as part of a win-now strategy, but no deals can happen without Glen signing off. And I think Glen's focus will be on keeping his powder dry enough to be able to sign his three studs at the end of their rookie deals if they reach their ceilngs...without having to play luxury tax.

I'm a bit confused by this LST. We would have Bird rights on all of these young guys. So as long as we are generally under the cap we will sign all of our guys with exemptions. It only limits our ability for future FA's as I see it, apart from the mid level exemptions. But let's cross that bridge when we get there. As you rightly pointed out we have no idea what the financial future will be. But I say that is exactly why we don't save money now. I am sure that if anything the owners will try to maintain the abilty to keep their players in the CBA. This has been in place since the 80s and generally isn't going anywhere. If anything the players are going to try to push the nature of the cap in negotiations and make it more palatable for us/ The luxury tax is trying to get at teams that are constantly taking on new salary, one player wont change that for us.

Thanks LST for that breakdown. That was very interesting. We often don't think about some of the minority owners.

Teams build championship quality via the draft. (San Antonio) Or like teams that Lebron have been on....multiple max players, vets and quality vets are willing to go to a championship level team for the vet minimum cheap. (Ray Allen, Mike Miller, etc)

I personally doubt we keep all three of Wiggins, KAT and Lavine. But if we can sign a Horford type player, we still have rights to the young guys, and if we become really good like the Golden State Warriors have shown can be done quickly and competing for Championship....the vets will come even tho we are in Minnesota.

Winning creates options, good coaches create respect, GM's make the organization coveted, and drafting starters or fringe starters is what is finally needed like what Flip has started after the McFail and Kahn eras.

I'm all on board on going after a legit Big FA. This organization needs to stop being Pu$$ies and start acting like we are the next GS

thedoper wrote:

longstrangetrip wrote:Cam, your argument that the Wolves will likely not be in as good a position in future summers as this summer to lure a big fish is valid. The problem is: what happens in 3-4 years when our big three demand their max or near max contracts? Yes, the salary cap is going up, but max contracts also go up proportionally (25-30% of the cap), and 4 max or near max players will put the Wolves well over the luxury tax...and Glen and his ownership group don't want that. Do the math:

Horford: 30% of the cap
Wig and KAT: each 25% of the cap (because they will not be 8-year players)
LaVine: say, no max but still 20% of the cap

That's 100% of the cap spent on 4 out of 15 players! Add in Rubio and Gorgui, maybe Shabazz, Belly, and a bunch of role players who also need to get paid, and the Wolves will be in a terrible luxury tax predicament.

Now, you may be saying "Glen is a billionaire...he's not going to worry about a luxury tax if he can win a championship or two". I think that's partially right, but even a billionaire is going to try to avoid such an onerous tax (look it up to see how awful it can be).

But the real issue is Glen's minority owners. After two more came on board last week (I believe this is now public information) at 15-20%, that leaves them at 5 relatively significant minority owners representing over a third of the ownership (Debbie Saunders has decided to not sell Flip's interest). While the minority owners are also wealthy, they aren't "Glen wealthy", and they are not going to be on board with any luxury tax. Luxury tax puts the Wolves into a serious cash flow situation, and would certainly lead to capital call from all owners, and everyone (including Glen) would have to visit their banker to cover a capital call. You might argue: "Big deal...so they borrow a little more now. They get it all back when they eventually sell". But it's not that easy. I can assure you that it is a scary thing for these minority owners to borrow more, when they recognize that at any time an impulsive and stubborn ownership or player group can decide to strike...and a long-term strike could significantly impact the value of these franchises. Who knows...Glen maybe even had to make some assurances to the now owners who joined the group last week that the team would never get into a luxury tax situation, and thus it would be unlikely that there will be any future capital calls.

Thibs/Leyden may want to bring on a max deal this summer as part of a win-now strategy, but no deals can happen without Glen signing off. And I think Glen's focus will be on keeping his powder dry enough to be able to sign his three studs at the end of their rookie deals if they reach their ceilngs...without having to play luxury tax.

I'm a bit confused by this LST. We would have Bird rights on all of these young guys. So as long as we are generally under the cap we will sign all of our guys with exemptions. It only limits our ability for future FA's as I see it, apart from the mid level exemptions. But let's cross that bridge when we get there. As you rightly pointed out we have no idea what the financial future will be. But I say that is exactly why we don't save money now. I am sure that if anything the owners will try to maintain the abilty to keep their players in the CBA. This has been in place since the 80s and generally isn't going anywhere. If anything the players are going to try to push the nature of the cap in negotiations and make it more palatable for us/ The luxury tax is trying to get at teams that are constantly taking on new salary, one player wont change that for us.

You're right, doper, that having Bird rights gives us the right to retain all these players if we want. But you only have to look at OkC a few years ago for the problem. They had the right to retain all 3 of their Big 3, but they also knew that three max salaries plus pieces they would need to win a championship would put them into the luxury tax...so they gave Harden up for almost nothing. Now if KAT, Wig and Zach all reach their very high ceilings, the Wolves could already find themselves in an OkC situation without even adding Horford, but certainly entering into a free agent max contract now is going to guarantee problems down the road (unless our 3 young studs flame out, and who wants to think of that).

Crossing that bridge when we get there makes some sense because of the uncertainty of the future (i.e we don't know that our young guys will get anywhere near their ceilings), but Glen has to anticipate everything that might happen so that he doesn't have to either force a capital call on his investors or pull a James Harden release move on one of our Big 3.

longstrangetrip wrote:

thedoper wrote:

longstrangetrip wrote:Cam, your argument that the Wolves will likely not be in as good a position in future summers as this summer to lure a big fish is valid. The problem is: what happens in 3-4 years when our big three demand their max or near max contracts? Yes, the salary cap is going up, but max contracts also go up proportionally (25-30% of the cap), and 4 max or near max players will put the Wolves well over the luxury tax...and Glen and his ownership group don't want that. Do the math:

Horford: 30% of the cap
Wig and KAT: each 25% of the cap (because they will not be 8-year players)
LaVine: say, no max but still 20% of the cap

That's 100% of the cap spent on 4 out of 15 players! Add in Rubio and Gorgui, maybe Shabazz, Belly, and a bunch of role players who also need to get paid, and the Wolves will be in a terrible luxury tax predicament.

Now, you may be saying "Glen is a billionaire...he's not going to worry about a luxury tax if he can win a championship or two". I think that's partially right, but even a billionaire is going to try to avoid such an onerous tax (look it up to see how awful it can be).

But the real issue is Glen's minority owners. After two more came on board last week (I believe this is now public information) at 15-20%, that leaves them at 5 relatively significant minority owners representing over a third of the ownership (Debbie Saunders has decided to not sell Flip's interest). While the minority owners are also wealthy, they aren't "Glen wealthy", and they are not going to be on board with any luxury tax. Luxury tax puts the Wolves into a serious cash flow situation, and would certainly lead to capital call from all owners, and everyone (including Glen) would have to visit their banker to cover a capital call. You might argue: "Big deal...so they borrow a little more now. They get it all back when they eventually sell". But it's not that easy. I can assure you that it is a scary thing for these minority owners to borrow more, when they recognize that at any time an impulsive and stubborn ownership or player group can decide to strike...and a long-term strike could significantly impact the value of these franchises. Who knows...Glen maybe even had to make some assurances to the now owners who joined the group last week that the team would never get into a luxury tax situation, and thus it would be unlikely that there will be any future capital calls.

Thibs/Leyden may want to bring on a max deal this summer as part of a win-now strategy, but no deals can happen without Glen signing off. And I think Glen's focus will be on keeping his powder dry enough to be able to sign his three studs at the end of their rookie deals if they reach their ceilngs...without having to play luxury tax.

I'm a bit confused by this LST. We would have Bird rights on all of these young guys. So as long as we are generally under the cap we will sign all of our guys with exemptions. It only limits our ability for future FA's as I see it, apart from the mid level exemptions. But let's cross that bridge when we get there. As you rightly pointed out we have no idea what the financial future will be. But I say that is exactly why we don't save money now. I am sure that if anything the owners will try to maintain the abilty to keep their players in the CBA. This has been in place since the 80s and generally isn't going anywhere. If anything the players are going to try to push the nature of the cap in negotiations and make it more palatable for us/ The luxury tax is trying to get at teams that are constantly taking on new salary, one player wont change that for us.

You're right, doper, that having Bird rights gives us the right to retain all these players if we want. But you only have to look at OkC a few years ago for the problem. They had the right to retain all 3 of their Big 3, but they also knew that three max salaries plus pieces they would need to win a championship would put them into the luxury tax...so they gave Harden up for almost nothing. Now if KAT, Wig and Zach all reach their very high ceilings, the Wolves could already find themselves in an OkC situation without even adding Horford, but certainly entering into a free agent max contract now is going to guarantee problems down the road (unless our 3 young studs flame out, and who wants to think of that).

Crossing that bridge when we get there makes some sense because of the uncertainty of the future (i.e we don't know that our young guys will get anywhere near their ceilings), but Glen has to anticipate everything that might happen so that he doesn't have to either force a capital call on his investors or pull a James Harden release move on one of our Big 3.

I get your point that is why glen has to understand the ramifications if we sign horford that he will have to go into the tax for 1 year. Also I think OKC realizes they screwed up, they still have 3 max contacts in kanter, Durant and Westbrook and a high contact in ibaka. If they were to do it over I bet they pay Harden over Kanter for that 3rd max