Minnesota Sports Forum

FNG wrote:

Camden wrote:

kekgeek1 wrote:

WolvesFan21 wrote:The thing is too which I posted before the draft. A GM is really putting his job on the line if he trades up to number 1. If that player busts or is simply mediocre then he's gone. It's too much risk and I felt that it wasn't going to happen. Versus staying put, make a lower pick. No one is calling for the GM's head if he whiffs on a 10th overall pick.

You say this but then you expected Thibs to trade an all nba player plus other draft capital for the #3 pick..... mmmmm.... interesting

Very interesting indeed... even though we all know that deal wasn't available. The contradiction is real, though.

I tend to agree with WolvesFan21 here. I'm sure Rosas tried hard to find someone dumb enough to give up significant assets to move up to #1 in a draft with no clear #1 like Zion, but I'm not surprised that the assets offered weren't promising enough to swing the deal. There was a lot of advocacy here about trading the #1 pick for two other first rounders (I would have loved this too), but this would have had to involve three teams, one of whom was salivating about Edwards, Wiseman, or Ball. Good on Rosas for trying, but there just wasn't much likelihood of arriving at a deal that would have pleased us.

But as a newcomer, I'm not familiar with the Thibs deal you guys are saying WF21 was advocating. What was it, and how does it contradict his current stance?

WolvesFan21 has ripped/criticized Tom Thibodeau -- while patting himself on the back for the idea -- multiple times for not trading Jimmy Butler for a top-three pick before the 2018 NBA Draft in order to draft Luka Doncic -- a deal that was never available or feasible for multiple reasons. He has suggested that Thibs failed the Wolves by not making that trade.

So, the contradiction is that he acknowledges trading up to a top pick puts an executive's job on the line. Not to mention, there's the almost certain failure that comes with trading an All-NBA player for draft picks.

Camden wrote:

FNG wrote:

Camden wrote:

kekgeek1 wrote:

WolvesFan21 wrote:The thing is too which I posted before the draft. A GM is really putting his job on the line if he trades up to number 1. If that player busts or is simply mediocre then he's gone. It's too much risk and I felt that it wasn't going to happen. Versus staying put, make a lower pick. No one is calling for the GM's head if he whiffs on a 10th overall pick.

You say this but then you expected Thibs to trade an all nba player plus other draft capital for the #3 pick..... mmmmm.... interesting

Very interesting indeed... even though we all know that deal wasn't available. The contradiction is real, though.

I tend to agree with WolvesFan21 here. I'm sure Rosas tried hard to find someone dumb enough to give up significant assets to move up to #1 in a draft with no clear #1 like Zion, but I'm not surprised that the assets offered weren't promising enough to swing the deal. There was a lot of advocacy here about trading the #1 pick for two other first rounders (I would have loved this too), but this would have had to involve three teams, one of whom was salivating about Edwards, Wiseman, or Ball. Good on Rosas for trying, but there just wasn't much likelihood of arriving at a deal that would have pleased us.

But as a newcomer, I'm not familiar with the Thibs deal you guys are saying WF21 was advocating. What was it, and how does it contradict his current stance?

WolvesFan21 has ripped/criticized Tom Thibodeau -- while patting himself on the back for the idea -- multiple times for not trading Jimmy Butler for a top-three pick before the 2018 NBA Draft in order to draft Luka Doncic -- a deal that was never available or feasible for multiple reasons. He has suggested that Thibs failed the Wolves by not making that trade.

So, the contradiction is that he acknowledges trading up to a top pick puts an executive's job on the line. Not to mention, there's the almost certain failure that comes with trading an All-NBA player for draft picks.

Yeah, I would agree that deal was almost certainly never on the table, and Thibs is blameless on that one. And while my personal jury is still way out on Rosas, I also find him blameless in not being able to fulfill my wish to trade down. I just haven't been able to formulate a deal that would have been acceptable to all parties involved. Were there any deals discussed here before the draft that posters thought could have worked out for both (or all) teams?

Besides not making James Wiseman the top overall pick, I think Gersson Rosas should be criticized for allowing Wiseman to fall into Golden State's lap and/or not extracting value out of Charlotte when it was reported that they wanted to trade up for Wiseman. He mismanaged that situation and left assets on the table, in my opinion. There's a very real possibility that he could have traded down to three and still selected Anthony Edwards if he determined he was the best pick for this franchise. Outside of that, I have no way to know what other deals were on the table for the first overall pick.

The situation with 17 is a different conversation entirely.

Camden wrote:Besides not making James Wiseman the top overall pick, I think Gersson Rosas should be criticized for allowing Wiseman to fall into Golden State's lap and/or not extracting value out of Charlotte when it was reported that they wanted to trade up for Wiseman. He mismanaged that situation and left assets on the table, in my opinion. There's a very real possibility that he could have traded down to three and still selected Anthony Edwards if he determined he was the best pick for this franchise. Outside of that, I have no way to know what other deals were on the table for the first overall pick.

The situation with 17 is a different conversation entirely.

I agree, Cam. We'll never know for sure exactly what Rosas left on the table. But there can be no doubt that he had opportunities to trade down from #1 for additional assets while still having the chance to draft Vassell, Okongwu, Deni, Patrick Williams, Okoro, Toppin or Haliburton with a later lottery pick. And the reports about Charlotte wanting Wiseman were convincing. Getting Miles Bridges or the Hornets' #32 pick (or both) along with the 3rd pick would have been a better move for the Wolves in my view. That move had value in preventing the Warriors from getting Wiseman as you noted. It also had value for the Wolves in the additional assets received and, as you also noted, there's a chance the Wolves would have still been able to draft Edwards at #3.

lipoli390 wrote:
I agree, Cam. We'll never know for sure exactly what Rosas left on the table. But there can be no doubt that he had opportunities to trade down from #1 for additional assets while still having the chance to draft Vassell, Okongwu, Deni, Patrick Williams, Okoro, Toppin or Haliburton with a later lottery pick. And the reports about Charlotte wanting Wiseman were convincing. Getting Miles Bridges or the Hornets' #32 pick (or both) along with the 3rd pick would have been a better move for the Wolves in my view. That move had value in preventing the Warriors from getting Wiseman as you noted. It also had value for the Wolves in the additional assets received and, as you also noted, there's a chance the Wolves would have still been able to draft Edwards at #3.

I wouldn't be sure that Edwards would have been available at #3. With Thompson out for the season, Warriors might have drafted Edwards by themselves or they might have made trade down with someone else taking Edwards.

Other issue I have with trade down for Bridges (or #32 pick) and #3 is that Bridges would have taken one more roster spot so Wolves wouldn't have RHJ now.

So trade down might have meaned that they would have now Obi Toppin and Bridges instead of Edwards and RHJ. I think that I might like Edwards and RHJ more.

Mikkeman wrote:

lipoli390 wrote:
I agree, Cam. We'll never know for sure exactly what Rosas left on the table. But there can be no doubt that he had opportunities to trade down from #1 for additional assets while still having the chance to draft Vassell, Okongwu, Deni, Patrick Williams, Okoro, Toppin or Haliburton with a later lottery pick. And the reports about Charlotte wanting Wiseman were convincing. Getting Miles Bridges or the Hornets' #32 pick (or both) along with the 3rd pick would have been a better move for the Wolves in my view. That move had value in preventing the Warriors from getting Wiseman as you noted. It also had value for the Wolves in the additional assets received and, as you also noted, there's a chance the Wolves would have still been able to draft Edwards at #3.

I wouldn't be sure that Edwards would have been available at #3. With Thompson out for the season, Warriors might have drafted Edwards by themselves or they might have made trade down with someone else taking Edwards.

Other issue I have with trade down for Bridges (or #32 pick) and #3 is that Bridges would have taken one more roster spot so Wolves wouldn't have RHJ now.

So trade down might have meaned that they would have now Obi Toppin and Bridges instead of Edwards and RHJ. I think that I might like Edwards and RHJ more.

Just for this season? Or moving forward?

A big part of Hollis-Jefferson's value is that he's getting paid only $1.8M. If he plays well, it's highly likely he's either getting a significant raise... or moving on for more money elsewhere after the season.

He's "fine." Certainly maybe the best of what the Wolves have to offer. But does that say more about RHJ or the Wolves? It's not like he refused to sign elsewhere for more money while waiting for the Wolves to offer him a one-year $1.8M deal. The Wolves are treating him like this year's version of Noah Vonleh... and the comparison isn't entirely off. The year prior it was Luol Deng.

Each player was a slight variation of the previous one. But each was a decent but unspectacular veteran who came cheap... for a reason.

Mikkeman wrote:

lipoli390 wrote:
I agree, Cam. We'll never know for sure exactly what Rosas left on the table. But there can be no doubt that he had opportunities to trade down from #1 for additional assets while still having the chance to draft Vassell, Okongwu, Deni, Patrick Williams, Okoro, Toppin or Haliburton with a later lottery pick. And the reports about Charlotte wanting Wiseman were convincing. Getting Miles Bridges or the Hornets' #32 pick (or both) along with the 3rd pick would have been a better move for the Wolves in my view. That move had value in preventing the Warriors from getting Wiseman as you noted. It also had value for the Wolves in the additional assets received and, as you also noted, there's a chance the Wolves would have still been able to draft Edwards at #3.

I wouldn't be sure that Edwards would have been available at #3. With Thompson out for the season, Warriors might have drafted Edwards by themselves or they might have made trade down with someone else taking Edwards.

Other issue I have with trade down for Bridges (or #32 pick) and #3 is that Bridges would have taken one more roster spot so Wolves wouldn't have RHJ now.

So trade down might have meaned that they would have now Obi Toppin and Bridges instead of Edwards and RHJ. I think that I might like Edwards and RHJ more.

I'm almost certain Edwards would not have been available at 3, Mikkeman, and I'm confident Rosas knew that too. The Warriors are astute talent evaluators, and likely wanted nothing to do with Ball. In the deal Lipoli proposes, we would have ended up with Ball and Bridges rather than Edwards and RHJ. Time will tell whether that duet will be better than the one we ended up with, but I don't think it would have been very popular here. I think Lipoli has provided a good example of the kind of deals that were proposed to Rosas- with no clear #1 and a lot of talent after the Big 3, no astute GM was going to offer much to move up. I too really wanted the Wolves to trade down, but I've yet to hear of a potential deal that realistically could have been presented to Rosas that would have made this team better. In my opinion, the only logical talker here with the first pick is Edwards vs. Wiseman, because i just don't think anything else was on the table.

How can you be certain that Anthony Edwards wouldn't be available at three? That's seems like irrational confidence to me. If the Wolves trade with Charlotte and they take James Wiseman as expected, then all eyes are on Golden State with what they'd do. Are they taking Edwards or trading the pick? Well, I see no need for Edwards on that roster even with Klay Thompson out, and it's fair to assess that they had already prepared the framework of the Kelly Oubre deal before draft night. The Warriors had done their homework. But their frontcourt remained a problem area.

I think it's more likely that Golden State trades down. They could have even traded down just two spots with Chicago and picked up Wendell Carter Jr., reportedly. That would have allowed them to select Deni Avdija, Patrick Williams, or any other prospect that fit their roster better. That's the better bet.

And who would Chicago have drafted after trading up? Well, all indications point towards the Bulls wanting LaMelo Ball. The chatter was that they wouldn't let him fall past four and were already trying to move up to get him pre-draft.

And I'm sure there were other opportunities available that leave Edwards to the Wolves at three in that scenario. Maybe the Knicks or Pistons trade up for the allure of Ball. To have such confidence that Edwards was going second overall when there's enough reason to believe otherwise just doesn't add up to me.

Camden wrote:How can you be certain that Anthony Edwards wouldn't be available at three? That's seems like irrational confidence to me. If the Wolves trade with Charlotte and they take James Wiseman as expected, then all eyes are on Golden State with what they'd do. Are they taking Edwards or trading the pick? Well, I see no need for Edwards on that roster even with Klay Thompson out, and it's fair to assess that they had already prepared the framework of the Kelly Oubre deal before draft night. The Warriors had done their homework. But their frontcourt remained a problem area.

I think it's more likely that Golden State trades down. They could have even traded down just two spots with Chicago and picked up Wendell Carter Jr., reportedly. That would have allowed them to select Deni Avdija, Patrick Williams, or any other prospect that fit their roster better. That's the better bet.

And who would Chicago have drafted after trading up? Well, all indications point towards the Bulls wanting LaMelo Ball. The chatter was that they wouldn't let him fall past four and were already trying to move up to get him pre-draft.

And I'm sure there were other opportunities available that leave Edwards to the Wolves at three in that scenario. Maybe the Knicks or Pistons trade up for the allure of Ball. To have such confidence that Edwards was going second overall when there's enough reason to believe otherwise just doesn't add up to me.

Agreed.

I don't see why GSW would have felt stuck at #2 if they didn't really dig the guy there.

AbeVigodaLive wrote:

Camden wrote:How can you be certain that Anthony Edwards wouldn't be available at three? That's seems like irrational confidence to me. If the Wolves trade with Charlotte and they take James Wiseman as expected, then all eyes are on Golden State with what they'd do. Are they taking Edwards or trading the pick? Well, I see no need for Edwards on that roster even with Klay Thompson out, and it's fair to assess that they had already prepared the framework of the Kelly Oubre deal before draft night. The Warriors had done their homework. But their frontcourt remained a problem area.

I think it's more likely that Golden State trades down. They could have even traded down just two spots with Chicago and picked up Wendell Carter Jr., reportedly. That would have allowed them to select Deni Avdija, Patrick Williams, or any other prospect that fit their roster better. That's the better bet.

And who would Chicago have drafted after trading up? Well, all indications point towards the Bulls wanting LaMelo Ball. The chatter was that they wouldn't let him fall past four and were already trying to move up to get him pre-draft.

And I'm sure there were other opportunities available that leave Edwards to the Wolves at three in that scenario. Maybe the Knicks or Pistons trade up for the allure of Ball. To have such confidence that Edwards was going second overall when there's enough reason to believe otherwise just doesn't add up to me.

Agreed.

I don't see why GSW would have felt stuck at #2 if they didn't really dig the guy there.

I think they would have felt stuck because they would have been hit with the same reality Rosas was likely hit with- the Big 3 were just not attractive enough to lead any savvy GM to offer much of value to move up. Or at least all offers weren't considered attractive enough to pull the trigger. That's why there was no movement in the top 3, even though we can be fairly certain there were a lot of weak offers. We've heard the Bulls offered Carter to move up two spots, but to my point, the offer (if there even was an offer) was not deemed sufficient to accept. Would the Bulls have offered Carter to move up to get Edwards if we had chosen Wiseman? Maybe, but doubtful. And even though there was chatter that they were not going to let Ball fall below 4, it was just that- chatter. And there's no indication they would take Ball at 2. The Rosas detractors here are putting a lot of faith in the ability of the top 3 picks to move down, and yet it didn't happen for some very good reasons If I'm Rosas, I'm not willing to roll the dice on GS not choosing Edwards or trading down, in which case I would still bet money that the team trading up would select Edwards, leaving us still stuck with Ball- or with a third pick that isn't very valuable in the eyes of the GM's below us. The prevailing opinion here was "Wiseman, but also anything but Ball". I think Rosas also wanted to avoid Ball at all costs, and knew that trading down to 3 would leave us with Ball as the top guy on the board. No thanks.

Trading down was my first choice, but it was not without a significant element of risk if Wiseman and Edwards went 1-2. I wouldn't have done it, and I'm glad Rosas avoided that risk.