Minnesota Sports Forum

Camden wrote:

The New York Knicks are expected to present Jalen Brunson a four-year offer in the vicinity of $110 million, league sources told Yahoo Sports.

- D'Angelo Russell signing an extension with the Minnesota Timberwolves this off-season already looked unlikely, but I'd say it's even less likely if that is what Jalen Brunson signs for.

- There's zero chance Russell and his camp would agree to anything less than what is going to be offered to Brunson.

- Brunson would reset the market for point guards below the top tier. This is essentially why I wanted Minnesota to try and get an extension done with Russell before it got to this point, however, that may not have been feasible depending on what was being offered on either side.

If DLO does leave what team do you think makes the most sense for him? Is there a playoff team that is one DLO away from being a contender?

In reference to the Looney, DLO, and Brunson talk in the last few posts, I think teams are really going to value playoff performance when it comes to compensation.

Looney was crucial for the Warriors down the stretch. A two-year 10 million dollar deal at 5 million per year would likely be viewed as an insult. I'm sure the Warriors would pay more than that plus whatever luxury tax they have to pay to keep him.

And Brunson may actually get more than 110. I personally wouldn't pay him more than that, but compare his playoff stats to DLO's, keeping in mind Brunson also played solid D and DLO wasn't good enough to avoid getting benched for Jordan McLaughlin in crunch time partly because his D regressed to the point where he was getting targeted. Here's the playoff stats from this last postseason.

GP GS MIN FG FG% 3PT 3P% FT FT% OR DR REB AST BLK STL PF TO PTS
Brunson
18 18 34.9 8.1-17.3 46.6 1.4-4.2 34.7 4.0-5.0 80.0 0.8 3.8 4.6 3.7 0.1 0.8 2.1 1.1 21.6
Russell
6 6 32.7 4.0-12.0 33.3 2.0-5.2 38.7 2.0-2.7 75.0 0.0 2.5 2.5 6.7 0.0 1.5 2.8 2.8 12.0

I admitted up and down last year throughout the regular season that DLO was actually impressing me despite my long-held criticism of that guy. He was still slow and not very physical, which were always two of my major criticisms of him, but his defense was definitely better than in the past and I think he was really starting to show some of the leadership qualities, and those were the other two things I'd always faulted him for. The guy clearly had a good year and that should count for something. But despite a couple strengths (3point% and assists), it kind of fell apart in the playoffs for him, and at the end of the day, we're good enough now that that's what matters. We can't afford to be paying good regular season guys who might fold in the playoffs. Credit to DLO for still setting guys up when his shot abandoned him and he did still pick up some steals (partly because he was getting targeted so much), but as clever and crafty as he showed himself to be on defense last year, it just couldn't help him enough when playoff basketball hit and the speed, physicality, and intensity of the game ramped up. And some of the decisions he made were just so questionable, it would be tough for me to feel good about going into the playoffs with him again next year as our main playmaker. Brunson obviously played a different role with Luka out there, which is why I'd feel wary about offering him so much if I were the Knicks (and if I were Brunson, I'd much rather stay with his role in Dallas), but he delivered on what that team needed in the playoffs, and that will be rewarded for sure.

My main point isn't to get into a disagreement about Looney, Brunson, and DLO though. It's to point out that I think teams are starting to conclude more and more that what should really matter is playoff performance, and I think for good teams, that's a smart choice. If all that mattered was the regular season, of course DLO could arguably get as much, if not more than Brunson. But if a guy is a great regular-season player but can get exposed in the playoffs, I think the reality is that the league is going to value those guys less. That's honestly partly why guys like Gobert, who is amazing as a defender in the regular season, is seeing his stock drop so much now teams have successfully gone small on him over the course of a playoff series (this is also one reason why a guy like Duren will likely be a much more valuable center than guys like Williams and Kessler). There's also a long history of short PGs who can't guard well also being a defensive liability in the postseason, and thus only the really elite short PGs can hold their value. Cole Anthony has never seen the playoffs, but I wouldn't touch him with a 10-foot pole despite those gaudy regular-season numbers because he's such a defensive liability. At the end of the day, teams should be saving the big money for guys who can't get played off the floor in a playoff series, and it sounds like they're starting to recognize that more and more.

EDIT: sorry the formatting for those stats is wonky. Can't really get them to format well.

worldK wrote:

Camden wrote:

worldK wrote:How about Kevon Looney? He will be a solid option to have as a young veteran big who contributes to winning.

Looney would also be a good fit. I just don't see Golden State allowing him to walk. He's very much an unsung hero for the Warriors. I would imagine there will be mutual interest in getting a new deal done.

The warriors wants him back and I am pretty sure his preference is to stay but it will come down to money. He was a bargain at 5m a year. I think a short 2 year deal at mid level or 10m a year might interests him.

I'd love to get Looney. But I have no doubt Golden State will match any offer we make, in which he'll stay with the Warriors. He's already said he's like to stay there. The Warriors are already well over the luxury tax and their owners have extremely deep pockets. So going a little further into the luxury tax zone won't deter the Warriors from paying what it takes to keep their championship core together.

I think it's a similar dynamic with Nurkic. I actually think he'd be the best fit for the Wolves, but I see Portland matching or exceeding a full MLE offer to keep him.

Camden wrote:

The New York Knicks are expected to present Jalen Brunson a four-year offer in the vicinity of $110 million, league sources told Yahoo Sports.

- D'Angelo Russell signing an extension with the Minnesota Timberwolves this off-season already looked unlikely, but I'd say it's even less likely if that is what Jalen Brunson signs for.

- There's zero chance Russell and his camp would agree to anything less than what is going to be offered to Brunson.

- Brunson would reset the market for point guards below the top tier. This is essentially why I wanted Minnesota to try and get an extension done with Russell before it got to this point, however, that may not have been feasible depending on what was being offered on either side.

I now give it 10% odds that we sign DLO to an extension, 40% odds that we trade him this offseason, and 50% odds that we run it back with him on the final year of his deal.

Q-was-here wrote:

Camden wrote:

The New York Knicks are expected to present Jalen Brunson a four-year offer in the vicinity of $110 million, league sources told Yahoo Sports.

- D'Angelo Russell signing an extension with the Minnesota Timberwolves this off-season already looked unlikely, but I'd say it's even less likely if that is what Jalen Brunson signs for.

- There's zero chance Russell and his camp would agree to anything less than what is going to be offered to Brunson.

- Brunson would reset the market for point guards below the top tier. This is essentially why I wanted Minnesota to try and get an extension done with Russell before it got to this point, however, that may not have been feasible depending on what was being offered on either side.

I now give it 10% odds that we sign DLO to an extension, 40% odds that we trade him this offseason, and 50% odds that we run it back with him on the final year of his deal.

Q - I'd say its 9% we sign him to an extension, 39% we trade him and 52% we run out the final year of his deal. :)

lipoli390 wrote:

Q-was-here wrote:

Camden wrote:

The New York Knicks are expected to present Jalen Brunson a four-year offer in the vicinity of $110 million, league sources told Yahoo Sports.

- D'Angelo Russell signing an extension with the Minnesota Timberwolves this off-season already looked unlikely, but I'd say it's even less likely if that is what Jalen Brunson signs for.

- There's zero chance Russell and his camp would agree to anything less than what is going to be offered to Brunson.

- Brunson would reset the market for point guards below the top tier. This is essentially why I wanted Minnesota to try and get an extension done with Russell before it got to this point, however, that may not have been feasible depending on what was being offered on either side.

I now give it 10% odds that we sign DLO to an extension, 40% odds that we trade him this offseason, and 50% odds that we run it back with him on the final year of his deal.

Q - I'd say its 9% we sign him to an extension, 39% we trade him and 52% we run out the final year of his deal. :)

I agree with Lip. Q's percentages were entirely out of line.

AbeVigodaLive wrote:

lipoli390 wrote:

Q-was-here wrote:

Camden wrote:

The New York Knicks are expected to present Jalen Brunson a four-year offer in the vicinity of $110 million, league sources told Yahoo Sports.

- D'Angelo Russell signing an extension with the Minnesota Timberwolves this off-season already looked unlikely, but I'd say it's even less likely if that is what Jalen Brunson signs for.

- There's zero chance Russell and his camp would agree to anything less than what is going to be offered to Brunson.

- Brunson would reset the market for point guards below the top tier. This is essentially why I wanted Minnesota to try and get an extension done with Russell before it got to this point, however, that may not have been feasible depending on what was being offered on either side.

I now give it 10% odds that we sign DLO to an extension, 40% odds that we trade him this offseason, and 50% odds that we run it back with him on the final year of his deal.

Q - I'd say its 9% we sign him to an extension, 39% we trade him and 52% we run out the final year of his deal. :)

I agree with Lip. Q's percentages were entirely out of line.

I know, Abe. It's must amazing how clueless Q can be sometimes.

lipoli390 wrote:

Q-was-here wrote:

Camden wrote:

The New York Knicks are expected to present Jalen Brunson a four-year offer in the vicinity of $110 million, league sources told Yahoo Sports.

- D'Angelo Russell signing an extension with the Minnesota Timberwolves this off-season already looked unlikely, but I'd say it's even less likely if that is what Jalen Brunson signs for.

- There's zero chance Russell and his camp would agree to anything less than what is going to be offered to Brunson.

- Brunson would reset the market for point guards below the top tier. This is essentially why I wanted Minnesota to try and get an extension done with Russell before it got to this point, however, that may not have been feasible depending on what was being offered on either side.

I now give it 10% odds that we sign DLO to an extension, 40% odds that we trade him this offseason, and 50% odds that we run it back with him on the final year of his deal.

Q - I'd say its 9% we sign him to an extension, 39% we trade him and 52% we run out the final year of his deal. :)

Dane Moore would be proud of you both, although he's heard "it is over a 50-percent chance that D'Angelo Russell is traded this off-season." Whatever that means.

lipoli390 wrote:

AbeVigodaLive wrote:

lipoli390 wrote:

Q-was-here wrote:

Camden wrote:

The New York Knicks are expected to present Jalen Brunson a four-year offer in the vicinity of $110 million, league sources told Yahoo Sports.

- D'Angelo Russell signing an extension with the Minnesota Timberwolves this off-season already looked unlikely, but I'd say it's even less likely if that is what Jalen Brunson signs for.

- There's zero chance Russell and his camp would agree to anything less than what is going to be offered to Brunson.

- Brunson would reset the market for point guards below the top tier. This is essentially why I wanted Minnesota to try and get an extension done with Russell before it got to this point, however, that may not have been feasible depending on what was being offered on either side.

I now give it 10% odds that we sign DLO to an extension, 40% odds that we trade him this offseason, and 50% odds that we run it back with him on the final year of his deal.

Q - I'd say its 9% we sign him to an extension, 39% we trade him and 52% we run out the final year of his deal. :)

I agree with Lip. Q's percentages were entirely out of line.

I know, Abe. It's must amazing how clueless Q can be sometimes.

And I'm 110% sure you guys are both nit-wits! :LOL:

Q-was-here wrote:

lipoli390 wrote:

AbeVigodaLive wrote:

lipoli390 wrote:

Q-was-here wrote:

Camden wrote:

The New York Knicks are expected to present Jalen Brunson a four-year offer in the vicinity of $110 million, league sources told Yahoo Sports.

- D'Angelo Russell signing an extension with the Minnesota Timberwolves this off-season already looked unlikely, but I'd say it's even less likely if that is what Jalen Brunson signs for.

- There's zero chance Russell and his camp would agree to anything less than what is going to be offered to Brunson.

- Brunson would reset the market for point guards below the top tier. This is essentially why I wanted Minnesota to try and get an extension done with Russell before it got to this point, however, that may not have been feasible depending on what was being offered on either side.

I now give it 10% odds that we sign DLO to an extension, 40% odds that we trade him this offseason, and 50% odds that we run it back with him on the final year of his deal.

Q - I'd say its 9% we sign him to an extension, 39% we trade him and 52% we run out the final year of his deal. :)

I agree with Lip. Q's percentages were entirely out of line.

I know, Abe. It's must amazing how clueless Q can be sometimes.

And I'm 110% sure you guys are both nit-wits! :LOL:

Lol. I don't think that figure is disputable.