Minnesota Sports Forum

Camden wrote:

monsterpile wrote:

Camden wrote:

Q-was-here wrote:I would never advocate a fire sale on DLO, as he is not someone we should be desperately trying to move at any cost. But I think this franchise needs to consider him outside of their core building blocks, which means they should either a) move him for a decent return now, or b) keep him for now on an expiring deal. I'm just not comfortable signing him to a contract that might be difficult to trade, especially if he regresses next season.

If we do hold onto him, he has got to become the third option in that starting lineup - and I mean a distant third. Get that usage closer to 20% and start playing off the ball more. He simply isn't efficient enough to be taking as many shots as he normally does. And because he can't break down guys off the bounce, he has to rely on really difficult pull up 3s and leaning mid-rangers. It's great he has those in the tool bag when the shot clock is running down, but those simply aren't good shots under normal circumstances.

On the flip side, D'Angelo Russell would be heading into his second full season under Chris Finch with more experience playing alongside Karl-Anthony Towns and Anthony Edwards. He might also be even more comfortable in his role as a facilitator first versus being a top scoring option, which is what he's been asked to be on virtually every other team he's been on.

I say that because I think it's more likely that Russell builds on this past season and performs better in what will actually be a contract year. Speaking of regression, I think it's fair to expect him to cash in on his catch-and-shoot three-point tries with efficiency that resembles what he's done throughout his career -- or basically hitting 39-percent of those attempts instead of the career-low 34-percent that he made this year. Consider that roughly half of his threes came on this shot type. That regression would improve his overall scoring efficiency and make him an even more valuable component to Minnesota's offense.

I continue to think it would be wise to get Russell extended now -- at below or fair market value -- before he has a chance to bet on himself and have a better season in 2022-23.

I'm not against extending Russell now and like you I do see an opportunity to get him at a value contract of some sort. I also don't know how much he can really raise his value doing what bit of us have suggested. Regardless if I'm Russell I'm waiting to see what FA get paid this offseason. That could be when things get a bit more interesting. I've said I don't think Russell can demand a ton of money but maybe this offseason other guys get paid and then maybe the possible price tag goes up even for an extension. I think it could be good for either side to wait till next offseason to commit to each other.

That's another aspect to consider, but I'll present it from a different angle. Ideally, I think D'Angelo Russell would already have an extension or would extend prior to the draft and free agency, assuming he's not pounding the table for a max deal because then it's a different story entirely. I think if you could get him on anything from $20-million to $25-million annually for the next three or four years that would be a fair deal. However, Minnesota runs the risk of waiting. Not only is there the catalyst of Russell improving his play, but there's the possibility of an equal or inferior player resetting the market, therefore increasing what Russell could theoretically demand. For example, let's say there's a chance of getting Russell on a fair deal like I outlined above, but in waiting we see Jalen Brunson sign a maximum four-year, $130-million deal in free agency. Similarly, Fred VanVleet could work out an extension with Toronto this summer of up to four-years, $114-million. In either instance, I think those deals would absolutely have an effect on the Russell negotiations in which his camp could use those deals as leverage.

A very similar dynamic played out this off-season in the NFL. The Los Angeles Chargers were quick to re-sign Mike Williams prior to the receiver market being established and overpaid. Williams signed a three-year, $60-million deal prior to Jacksonville overpaying Christian Kirk to the tune of four-years, $84-million or A.J. Brown's extension with Philadelphia of four-years, $100-million. Had the Chargers waited it's very likely that Williams could have held out for a deal like theirs and been justified in doing so.

I think waiting to extend Russell will either lead to him re-signing for more than he would have this off-season, him walking in free agency next year, or him being traded mid-season for less than his on-court value is worth. None of which are optimal outcomes, in my opinion.

Camden wrote:

kekgeek1 wrote:

monsterpile wrote:

Camden wrote:

Q-was-here wrote:I would never advocate a fire sale on DLO, as he is not someone we should be desperately trying to move at any cost. But I think this franchise needs to consider him outside of their core building blocks, which means they should either a) move him for a decent return now, or b) keep him for now on an expiring deal. I'm just not comfortable signing him to a contract that might be difficult to trade, especially if he regresses next season.

If we do hold onto him, he has got to become the third option in that starting lineup - and I mean a distant third. Get that usage closer to 20% and start playing off the ball more. He simply isn't efficient enough to be taking as many shots as he normally does. And because he can't break down guys off the bounce, he has to rely on really difficult pull up 3s and leaning mid-rangers. It's great he has those in the tool bag when the shot clock is running down, but those simply aren't good shots under normal circumstances.

On the flip side, D'Angelo Russell would be heading into his second full season under Chris Finch with more experience playing alongside Karl-Anthony Towns and Anthony Edwards. He might also be even more comfortable in his role as a facilitator first versus being a top scoring option, which is what he's been asked to be on virtually every other team he's been on.

I say that because I think it's more likely that Russell builds on this past season and performs better in what will actually be a contract year. Speaking of regression, I think it's fair to expect him to cash in on his catch-and-shoot three-point tries with efficiency that resembles what he's done throughout his career -- or basically hitting 39-percent of those attempts instead of the career-low 34-percent that he made this year. Consider that roughly half of his threes came on this shot type. That regression would improve his overall scoring efficiency and make him an even more valuable component to Minnesota's offense.

I continue to think it would be wise to get Russell extended now -- at below or fair market value -- before he has a chance to bet on himself and have a better season in 2022-23.

I'm not against extending Russell now and like you I do see an opportunity to get him at a value contract of some sort. I also don't know how much he can really raise his value doing what bit of us have suggested. Regardless if I'm Russell I'm waiting to see what FA get paid this offseason. That could be when things get a bit more interesting. I've said I don't think Russell can demand a ton of money but maybe this offseason other guys get paid and then maybe the possible price tag goes up even for an extension. I think it could be good for either side to wait till next offseason to commit to each other.

The reason why I wouldn't extend him this offseason is because he couldn't be traded this season if he was.

If you're looking to extend D'Angelo Russell, then you're not looking to trade him this upcoming season anyways. You wouldn't extend with the idea of trading him right away.

And if you're looking to move him, then you're keeping him on an expiring deal to maximize the trade value.

In this case, you're either building with him and want to be opportunistic with getting his next contract done, or you don't see him in the team's future. It all comes down to how you value Russell, and how Russell (and his agents) evaluates the market.

monsterpile wrote:Mike Williams is overpaid anyway IMHO.

Why would Russell sign like days before seeing what happens in FA?

thedoper wrote:Dlo at an extension at the right price is a bigger trade asset than him as an expiring contract. The biggest issue remains DLo's perception of his own value at this point.

thedoper wrote:Dlo at an extension at the right price is a bigger trade asset than him as an expiring contract. The biggest issue remains DLo's perception of his own value at this point.

WildWolf2813 wrote:

thedoper wrote:Dlo at an extension at the right price is a bigger trade asset than him as an expiring contract. The biggest issue remains DLo's perception of his own value at this point.

I also think we have to wonder what his role would be on a really good team. Is he starting for a team that has legit title aspirations? I don't think so. I think they'd view him as a 6th man and would pay him appropriately. Otherwise, the teams with title aspirations would be bugging Tim nonstop to make offers. If he's not a starter in your eyes for a team hoping to win a title, even a 3/$80 offer is about $20-25 mil too much.

Camden wrote:

thedoper wrote:Dlo at an extension at the right price is a bigger trade asset than him as an expiring contract. The biggest issue remains DLo's perception of his own value at this point.

Yep. Not only that, but the value of what D'Angelo Russell provides on the court is better than what any of the gettable alternatives at point guard could provide. I do not see a better option available in the near future.

Again, this is all irrelevant if it's a one-sided demand of "give me a max contract or I'm testing free agency." I just don't see how that's a logical play from Russell's representation so I'm operating under the assumption that's not the case. I expect there to be a middle ground that could be found.

WildWolf2813 wrote:

thedoper wrote:Dlo at an extension at the right price is a bigger trade asset than him as an expiring contract. The biggest issue remains DLo's perception of his own value at this point.

I also think we have to wonder what his role would be on a really good team. Is he starting for a team that has legit title aspirations? I don't think so. I think they'd view him as a 6th man and would pay him appropriately. Otherwise, the teams with title aspirations would be bugging Tim nonstop to make offers. If he's not a starter in your eyes for a team hoping to win a title, even a 3/$80 offer is about $20-25 mil too much.