Minnesota Sports Forum

Phenom wrote: ↑Wed Jul 02, 2025 1:07 am

D-Loser25 wrote: ↑Tue Jul 01, 2025 7:42 pm

Phenom wrote: ↑Tue Jul 01, 2025 7:20 pm Myles Turner going to Milwaukee is a cautionary tale for when someone says "who is paying him that money" or " who were they competing against"?

The Pacers clearly had that internal dialogue and Milwaukee swooped in and figured it out.

We've can't underestimate the genius, insanity, resourcefulness, desperation, etc of 29 other teams. Someone has a way to make it happen.

Haha very true, but Naz isn’t Turner. Also, the amount of money Turner got shows that Naz was an overpay. I don’t think there was a great chance that anyone else offers Naz 5/125, with a player option, and if they do I say congrats and then I find a better way to spend that money on our final 4 roster spots.

I dont think Turner's money tells us much other than the Pacers are cheap (and probably unimaginative) and the Bucks paid him as much as they could.

For years reports were the Pacers were unwilling to deal Turner unless teams paid a pretty high price. This offseason they apparently isn't value him quite as highly. I like Turner but that much money for 4 years for a guy that has a history of missing quite a few games and is 29...is reasonably risky. I can understand why the Bucks did it tho.

Monster wrote: ↑Wed Jul 02, 2025 7:26 am

Phenom wrote: ↑Wed Jul 02, 2025 1:07 am

D-Loser25 wrote: ↑Tue Jul 01, 2025 7:42 pm

Haha very true, but Naz isn’t Turner. Also, the amount of money Turner got shows that Naz was an overpay. I don’t think there was a great chance that anyone else offers Naz 5/125, with a player option, and if they do I say congrats and then I find a better way to spend that money on our final 4 roster spots.

I dont think Turner's money tells us much other than the Pacers are cheap (and probably unimaginative) and the Bucks paid him as much as they could.

For years reports were the Pacers were unwilling to deal Turner unless teams paid a pretty high price. This offseason they apparently isn't value him quite as highly. I like Turner but that much money for 4 years for a guy that has a history of missing quite a few games and is 29...is reasonably risky. I can understand why the Bucks did it tho.

Turner’s injury history is definitely an important factor. I don’t believe that matching Milwaukee’s offer would have pushed them Pacers over the 2nd apron and he was really important to their success this past season. So I’m not sure they did the right thing. On the other hand, with Haliburton out next season I can see why they wouldn’t want to commit a lot of money to Turner knowing his injury history and realizing that they could easily end up in the lottery next season. I don’t think the amount the Bucks are paying is unreasonable or terribly inflated. What makes this deal risky for the Bucks is that they had to stretch and release Lillard to make it happen. Effectively, the payroll hit from signing Turner is much higher than Turner’s contract.

So it was definitely a risky move by the Bucks as you noted, but in this case the risk seems warranted. The Bucks are in a desperate situation. The lack talent around Giannis and their draft cupboards are pretty bare. They’ve obviously decided to take one last shot at the prize with Giannis. They had to throw the hale Mary. Next season is the right time to take that shot with Tatum and Haliburton out for their teams and the Knicks transitioning to a new head coach. My prediction is that Giannis will ultimately be traded before the start of the 2026-27 season as the Bucks embark on a rebuild.

I agree with the opinion here that Denver has had a good offseason, but I still have the Wolves better than them (not so sure about Houston though). Cam Johnson and Michael Porter Jr. are quite similar statistically, although Porter is taller and a much better rebounder. And I've never been a big Hardaway Jr. guy, and don't think Detroit was motivated to keep him. He's a poor defender, and overrated as a 3-point shooter. To put it in perspective, 6 Timberwolves had a better 3-point shooting percentage than Hardaway last season, and his career 3-point shooting is right around the league average. Not a significant pickup for Denver, and I think we are still better than them.

FNG wrote: ↑Wed Jul 02, 2025 8:31 am I agree with the opinion here that Denver has had a good offseason, but I still have the Wolves better than them (not so sure about Houston though). Cam Johnson and Michael Porter Jr. are quite similar statistically, although Porter is taller and a much better rebounder. And I've never been a big Hardaway Jr. guy, and don't think Detroit was motivated to keep him. He's a poor defender, and overrated as a 3-point shooter. To put it in perspective, 6 Timberwolves had a better 3-point shooting percentage than Hardaway last season, and his career 3-point shooting is right around the league average. Not a significant pickup for Denver, and I think we are still better than them.

The thing about Denver though is that their starting lineup is so damn good with Jokic/Gordon/Murray that they have a lower bar for what an acceptable bench looks like. Don't forget they added JoVal too. They just need a group of three or four guys that they can bring off the bench and not have everything implode when Jokic sits.

Q-is-here wrote: ↑Wed Jul 02, 2025 8:45 am

FNG wrote: ↑Wed Jul 02, 2025 8:31 am I agree with the opinion here that Denver has had a good offseason, but I still have the Wolves better than them (not so sure about Houston though). Cam Johnson and Michael Porter Jr. are quite similar statistically, although Porter is taller and a much better rebounder. And I've never been a big Hardaway Jr. guy, and don't think Detroit was motivated to keep him. He's a poor defender, and overrated as a 3-point shooter. To put it in perspective, 6 Timberwolves had a better 3-point shooting percentage than Hardaway last season, and his career 3-point shooting is right around the league average. Not a significant pickup for Denver, and I think we are still better than them.

The thing about Denver though is that their starting lineup is so damn good with Jokic/Gordon/Murray that they have a lower bar for what an acceptable bench looks like. Don't forget they added JoVal too. They just need a group of three or four guys that they can bring off the bench and not have everything implode when Jokic sits.

The way I see it, you know what you’ll be getting from Denver next season after their roster moves. Their two stars, Jokic and Murray, will be great but won’t get better. The players they’ve acquired are what they are and can’t be reasonably expected to improve. The Wolves are a different story. It’s reasonable to expect further improvement from Ant, Jaden and even Naz. Donte had an off year last season, obviously impacted negatively by the surprise trade to MN. The law of averages alone makes it reasonable to expect his play will improve next season. We’ll be integrating two or three high-upside 2nd/3rd year players (TSJ, Clark, Dilly) into the rotation, which could be a big positive or a bit of a negative. So we really don’t know exactly what we’ll have next season. We could be a little better or a lot better. On the other hand, we could be a little worse if the young guys don’t come through, especially if Dilly falters and Mike declines. But we shouldn’t be more than a little worse because we’ll still have the same core.

If things click for us, I think we’ll be better than Denver. Assuming no major injuries, the Nuggets will likely be battling with Houston for 2nd place in the West. The Wolves will either beat out Denver for 2nd or be fighting again for th 6th seed.

Phenom wrote: ↑Wed Jul 02, 2025 1:07 am

D-Loser25 wrote: ↑Tue Jul 01, 2025 7:42 pm

Phenom wrote: ↑Tue Jul 01, 2025 7:20 pm Myles Turner going to Milwaukee is a cautionary tale for when someone says "who is paying him that money" or " who were they competing against"?

The Pacers clearly had that internal dialogue and Milwaukee swooped in and figured it out.

We've can't underestimate the genius, insanity, resourcefulness, desperation, etc of 29 other teams. Someone has a way to make it happen.

Haha very true, but Naz isn’t Turner. Also, the amount of money Turner got shows that Naz was an overpay. I don’t think there was a great chance that anyone else offers Naz 5/125, with a player option, and if they do I say congrats and then I find a better way to spend that money on our final 4 roster spots.

I dont think Turner's money tells us much other than the Pacers are cheap (and probably unimaginative) and the Bucks paid him as much as they could.

Exactly, Phenom!

Murray definitely can be better than what he was for Denver this year, he had a down year by all accounts. And how do we know Jokic won’t get better? He’s gotten better every single year he’s been in the league. Last season was his fifth in a row where he finally peaked.

Lipoli390 wrote: ↑Wed Jul 02, 2025 12:39 pm

Q-is-here wrote: ↑Wed Jul 02, 2025 8:45 am

FNG wrote: ↑Wed Jul 02, 2025 8:31 am I agree with the opinion here that Denver has had a good offseason, but I still have the Wolves better than them (not so sure about Houston though). Cam Johnson and Michael Porter Jr. are quite similar statistically, although Porter is taller and a much better rebounder. And I've never been a big Hardaway Jr. guy, and don't think Detroit was motivated to keep him. He's a poor defender, and overrated as a 3-point shooter. To put it in perspective, 6 Timberwolves had a better 3-point shooting percentage than Hardaway last season, and his career 3-point shooting is right around the league average. Not a significant pickup for Denver, and I think we are still better than them.

The thing about Denver though is that their starting lineup is so damn good with Jokic/Gordon/Murray that they have a lower bar for what an acceptable bench looks like. Don't forget they added JoVal too. They just need a group of three or four guys that they can bring off the bench and not have everything implode when Jokic sits.

The way I see it, you know what you’ll be getting from Denver next season after their roster moves. Their two stars, Jokic and Murray, will be great but won’t get better. The players they’ve acquired are what they are and can’t be reasonably expected to improve. The Wolves are a different story. It’s reasonable to expect further improvement from Ant, Jaden and even Naz. Donte had an off year last season, obviously impacted negatively by the surprise trade to MN. The law of averages alone makes it reasonable to expect his play will improve next season. We’ll be integrating two or three high-upside 2nd/3rd year players (TSJ, Clark, Dilly) into the rotation, which could be a big positive or a bit of a negative. So we really don’t know exactly what we’ll have next season. We could be a little better or a lot better. On the other hand, we could be a little worse if the young guys don’t come through, especially if Dilly falters and Mike declines. But we shouldn’t be more than a little worse because we’ll still have the same core.

If things click for us, I think we’ll be better than Denver. Assuming no major injuries, the Nuggets will likely be batting with Houston for 2nd place in the West. The Wolves will either beat out Denver for 2nd or be fighting again for th 6th seed.

Maybe someone has the numbers but Cam Johnson I believe is a better and more versatile defender and simply more of a complimentary offensive player that I think will be more what the Nuggets need than what MPJ provided. MPJ was pretty inconsistent at times with his scoring and when he wasn't scoring...his value drops off.

FNG does make some good points about Hardaway and he is probably not a huge get but a solid one. Hardaway Jr is the classic vet that for the Vet min is a nice enough player. It's worth remembering that Detroit was playing Beasley at times over him in the playoffs down the stretch. Still although I think especially for the regular season he is a nice guy to add to their roster. I believe despite his flaws he helped Detroit last year as a guy that could play. I think he has also become a good team guy in general. There is also a chance younger players pass him by in terms of minutes.

Valaciunas decided he wants to go overseas. I wonder where that leaves Saric, if the trade still happens.

Phenom wrote: ↑Thu Jul 03, 2025 8:58 pm Valaciunas decided he wants to go overseas. I wonder where that leaves Saric, if the trade still happens.

Denver would probably be happy for it to still go through if the salary was eliminated. Saric didn't fit there for whatever reason so just dumping him woukd have been great. Jonas would have been a pretty nice get for them so if he leaves that's gonna ding their A+ offseason grade.