Minnesota Sports Forum

sjm34 wrote:One thing I am unsure of is what happens if Rubio signs for the 5 years, and then the wolves strike a deal with GS involving Klay. He is eligible for an extension, and it would make sense to have him sign one before coming over, but I am not sure if a S&T on a rookie extension can be done for the five years and then traded. The CBA states that a team can only designate one player, but can trade for another that already has his deal in place.

If the wolves could get both on descending deals, it would really set the wolves up nicely for the future.

lipoli390 wrote:I think there is some overreaction to the recent salaries and Ricky's situation. The League is doing extremely well and the new CBA is spreading that huge pool of revenue more effectively around the League to teams like the Wolves. Moreover, the NBA's revenue stream is about to go up substantially from the upcoming new broadcast deals.

Very few teams are willing to pay the luxury tax and, as we've seen, paying the luxury tax doesn't seem to bring championships. If you don't believe me, just ask the Knicks and Nets. So no team has to go way above the salary cap into luxury tax territory to succeed.

What does this all mean for the Wolves? It means we shouldn't get all hot and bothered about paying Ricky a max deal. First, we can't blame his agent for asking and he may ultimately settle for less. Secondly, the Wolves will be able to afford a max deal for Ricky if necessary and still build a contending team if they make smart player personnel decisions over the next several years.

How did I come to this conclusion? The salary cap will increase from around $57 million last year to around $62 million this year with a luxury tax threshold of close to $80 million. Apparently, the new broadcast deal will likely drive the salary cap close to $80 million. That's what I read. Assuming Love leaves, and also assuming the Wolves don't get rid of any of their other current contracts guaranteed through 2015, then giving Ricky a max deal starting around $15 million in 2015, we give the Wolves a roster of 9 players under contract for a total of $53 million. Add Wiggins, Bennett and Waiters at a total of about 10 million and the Wolves would be right at the cap with a nearly full roster of 12. We'd still have room to sign someone at the full MLE without hitting the luxury tax. Assuming the cap goes up even to just around $70 million, the Wolves would have the cap space even after giving Ricky a max deal.

So here's my bottom line. We're simply not in a position to let both Love and Ricky walk over the next 12 months. Ricky is an excellent PG in every respect except shooting. He's a superb passer, excellent rebounder and very good defender. His style of play and personality attract other players to the team and help put butts in seats. In addition, if he ends up shooting the rest of his career like he did after the all-star break last season, his shooting will be on par with Jason Kidd's. And guess what. The Wolves can sign him with cap room to spare to fill out the roster with quality players and ensure Glen Taylor makes a profit. Refusing to pay Ricky the max doesn't do anything to advance the franchise because it's not like we'll be able to sign a star with the extra cap room. Stars don't sign with teams like Minnesota just for the money. In other words, with or without Ricky here on a max deal, the success of our franchise will depend on whether Flip makes good draft and trade decisions.

I'd certainly try to keep Ricky's contract in the $12 million per year range and I'd give him that amount for 5 years if the CBA allows. I think that would be a fair, reasonable deal for both sides. But a max deal wouldn't be a terrible outcome and it might be essential if necessary to keep him from walking with no assets in

Ricky attracts other players to the team? Whom might they be?

PorkChop wrote:

lipoli390 wrote:I think there is some overreaction to the recent salaries and Ricky's situation. The League is doing extremely well and the new CBA is spreading that huge pool of revenue more effectively around the League to teams like the Wolves. Moreover, the NBA's revenue stream is about to go up substantially from the upcoming new broadcast deals.

Very few teams are willing to pay the luxury tax and, as we've seen, paying the luxury tax doesn't seem to bring championships. If you don't believe me, just ask the Knicks and Nets. So no team has to go way above the salary cap into luxury tax territory to succeed.

What does this all mean for the Wolves? It means we shouldn't get all hot and bothered about paying Ricky a max deal. First, we can't blame his agent for asking and he may ultimately settle for less. Secondly, the Wolves will be able to afford a max deal for Ricky if necessary and still build a contending team if they make smart player personnel decisions over the next several years.

How did I come to this conclusion? The salary cap will increase from around $57 million last year to around $62 million this year with a luxury tax threshold of close to $80 million. Apparently, the new broadcast deal will likely drive the salary cap close to $80 million. That's what I read. Assuming Love leaves, and also assuming the Wolves don't get rid of any of their other current contracts guaranteed through 2015, then giving Ricky a max deal starting around $15 million in 2015, we give the Wolves a roster of 9 players under contract for a total of $53 million. Add Wiggins, Bennett and Waiters at a total of about 10 million and the Wolves would be right at the cap with a nearly full roster of 12. We'd still have room to sign someone at the full MLE without hitting the luxury tax. Assuming the cap goes up even to just around $70 million, the Wolves would have the cap space even after giving Ricky a max deal.

So here's my bottom line. We're simply not in a position to let both Love and Ricky walk over the next 12 months. Ricky is an excellent PG in every respect except shooting. He's a superb passer, excellent rebounder and very good defender. His style of play and personality attract other players to the team and help put butts in seats. In addition, if he ends up shooting the rest of his career like he did after the all-star break last season, his shooting will be on par with Jason Kidd's. And guess what. The Wolves can sign him with cap room to spare to fill out the roster with quality players and ensure Glen Taylor makes a profit. Refusing to pay Ricky the max doesn't do anything to advance the franchise because it's not like we'll be able to sign a star with the extra cap room. Stars don't sign with teams like Minnesota just for the money. In other words, with or without Ricky here on a max deal, the success of our franchise will depend on whether Flip makes good draft and trade decisions.

I'd certainly try to keep Ricky's contract in the $12 million per year range and I'd give him that amount for 5 years if the CBA allows. I think that would be a fair, reasonable deal for both sides. But a max deal wouldn't be a terrible outcome and it might be essential if necessary to keep him from walking with no assets in

Ricky attracts other players to the team? Whom might they be?

Porkchop -- Just about any scorer would love to play with a really good pass-first PG like Ricky.

lipoli390 wrote:

sjm34 wrote:It was just foolish giving Pek five years, when nobody was bidding for his services.

Agreed. Unless there were suitors behind the scenes we didn't hear about. But there were no reports, not even any rumors, that Pek was getting offers in the vicinity of the amount the Wolves ultimately gave him. That's the key. It's about a player's market value and what other teams are willing to pay determines that market value. Perhaps Flip had information we didn't that gave him reason to believe some other team would offer the same or more to Pek.

sjm34 wrote:No other team could give him more than 4 years though, and of all our players, Pek is likely the one guy that actually enjoys the winter here.

lipoli390 wrote:

sjm34 wrote:A five year flat would be closer to 75 mil Lip. I would prefer to give him a max with each season descending in value, and we could always throw in an incentive based on his TS% for each season. If the NBA deems it unlikely to happen, it doesn't go against the cap. Either way, we are overpaying for him, but at least we have a guy we like watching locked up for five more years.

Thanks for the clarification, SJM. I like your idea of the descending value with a TS-based incentive.

TheGrey08 wrote:

lipoli390 wrote:

sjm34 wrote:It was just foolish giving Pek five years, when nobody was bidding for his services.

Agreed. Unless there were suitors behind the scenes we didn't hear about. But there were no reports, not even any rumors, that Pek was getting offers in the vicinity of the amount the Wolves ultimately gave him. That's the key. It's about a player's market value and what other teams are willing to pay determines that market value. Perhaps Flip had information we didn't that gave him reason to believe some other team would offer the same or more to Pek.

For me the only issue with Pek's contract was the number of years like SJM said and then the injury history like Lip said. His average salary isn't terrible for someone with his skill set. Just wish he was at least a little bit more of a rim protector.

I vaguely recall there being quite a bit of pressure for the Wolves to resign him asap as if there were teams behind the scenes willing to pay him close to what the Wolves did and risk of someone going higher or giving him a max just to be assholes (Blazers maybe? I forget). I don't recall any rumors/reports however so could be remembering wrong.

sjm34 wrote:No other team could give him more than 4 years though, and of all our players, Pek is likely the one guy that actually enjoys the winter here.

I came away with the feeling the Wolves went 5 years to outbid a potential offer sheet.

monsterpile wrote:
It seemed quiet but it seemed like there were reports of a couple teams that were interested. It only takes one team to bid you up. Bottom line is Pek's salary looks plenty reasonable now (based on the market) and I thought it was about market value last year too. That 5th year at 11.7 million doesn't seem too awful (Centers make $$$$) and now we hear the cap will be higher so that might make that number even more palatable. Hopefully Flip is able to be careful with Pek limiting minutes and get more out of him. We can hope right?

lipoli390 wrote:Just about any scorer would love to play with a really good pass-first PG like Ricky.

horatio81 wrote:

lipoli390 wrote:Just about any scorer would love to play with a really good pass-first PG like Ricky.

Being an unselfish, pass-first player doesn't automatically make you valuable. Magic, KG, Duncan, CP3, Lebron - these "unselfish" superstars were/are devastatingly effective because passing was the first option... not the *only* option. Until Ricky actually learns how to score with league-average efficiency, he will continue to limit the offense and obliterate floor spacing to the absolute detriment of his teammates.

horatio81 wrote:

lipoli390 wrote:Just about any scorer would love to play with a really good pass-first PG like Ricky.

Being an unselfish, pass-first player doesn't automatically make you valuable. Magic, KG, Duncan, CP3, Lebron - these "unselfish" superstars were/are devastatingly effective because passing was the first option... not the *only* option. Until Ricky actually learns how to score with league-average efficiency, he will continue to limit the offense and obliterate floor spacing to the absolute detriment of his teammates.