Minnesota Sports Forum

rapsuperstar31 wrote:Is the luxury tax figured out at the end of the year? Say we sign Belly and use the MLE putting us into the tax, can we get out of that if we make a trade at the trade deadline?

The answer to your question, which is a good one, is yes.

Camden0916 wrote:

rapsuperstar31 wrote:Is the luxury tax figured out at the end of the year? Say we sign Belly and use the MLE putting us into the tax, can we get out of that if we make a trade at the trade deadline?

The answer to your question, which is a good one, is yes.

I'll add to Cam's answer that something that did change in the new CBA is that the amount that counts against t eye cap is prorated. So if you dump a salary you are dumping the remaining salary for the season not the whole thing like in the past. But yeah you can still do some maneuvers which is what a couple teams like the Raptors did I believe.

khans2k5 wrote:

monsterpile wrote:

khans2k5 wrote:I get the idea of signing KBD to a long-term deal, but that's just not something you do unless you are bringing in established talent like a Pek, Belly, etc. Stick to the two year minimum. Last thing you want is to sign someone to a 4 year deal who can't play.

The idea is you get him signed to 4 year deal and at least one of those years likely isn't guaranteed. The amount of money used from the mid-level is pretty small. Remember this is a guy that was widely considered a 1st round prospect and you can get him for dirt cheap the next 4 years? That's a gamble I think is worthwhile to make especially if the Wolves aren't planning to use the entire mid-level anyway. ITs basically doing a first round pick type contract only at a cheaper salary. The only question is if KBD would agree to the deal. A lot of guys have passed on these deals.

We already don't have a ton of MLE to use with the QO to Belly. I don't think it's smart using some of that money on a rookie second round draft pick. The odds are not in your favor that he's gonna be worth 3-4 years of a roster spot.

We might just agree to disagree here but we are seriously talking about a few hundred thousand bucks between locking in a guy for multiple years or not. It's not like FA money is always well spent either.

monsterpile wrote:

khans2k5 wrote:

monsterpile wrote:

khans2k5 wrote:I get the idea of signing KBD to a long-term deal, but that's just not something you do unless you are bringing in established talent like a Pek, Belly, etc. Stick to the two year minimum. Last thing you want is to sign someone to a 4 year deal who can't play.

The idea is you get him signed to 4 year deal and at least one of those years likely isn't guaranteed. The amount of money used from the mid-level is pretty small. Remember this is a guy that was widely considered a 1st round prospect and you can get him for dirt cheap the next 4 years? That's a gamble I think is worthwhile to make especially if the Wolves aren't planning to use the entire mid-level anyway. ITs basically doing a first round pick type contract only at a cheaper salary. The only question is if KBD would agree to the deal. A lot of guys have passed on these deals.

We already don't have a ton of MLE to use with the QO to Belly. I don't think it's smart using some of that money on a rookie second round draft pick. The odds are not in your favor that he's gonna be worth 3-4 years of a roster spot.

We might just agree to disagree here but we are seriously talking about a few hundred thousand bucks between locking in a guy for multiple years or not. It's not like FA money is always well spent either.

If it's only a couple hundred thousand then why is a 3-4 year deal for just a couple hundred thousand more not the standard for most second round picks? It's a highly uncommon practice outside of Euro-stash's that come over. Why do you think that is if the real value is locking guys in for cheap for 3-4 years and not really about the money? Everyone can do it and yet almost nobody does it. Why is that?

khans2k5 wrote:

monsterpile wrote:

khans2k5 wrote:

monsterpile wrote:

khans2k5 wrote:I get the idea of signing KBD to a long-term deal, but that's just not something you do unless you are bringing in established talent like a Pek, Belly, etc. Stick to the two year minimum. Last thing you want is to sign someone to a 4 year deal who can't play.

The idea is you get him signed to 4 year deal and at least one of those years likely isn't guaranteed. The amount of money used from the mid-level is pretty small. Remember this is a guy that was widely considered a 1st round prospect and you can get him for dirt cheap the next 4 years? That's a gamble I think is worthwhile to make especially if the Wolves aren't planning to use the entire mid-level anyway. ITs basically doing a first round pick type contract only at a cheaper salary. The only question is if KBD would agree to the deal. A lot of guys have passed on these deals.

We already don't have a ton of MLE to use with the QO to Belly. I don't think it's smart using some of that money on a rookie second round draft pick. The odds are not in your favor that he's gonna be worth 3-4 years of a roster spot.

We might just agree to disagree here but we are seriously talking about a few hundred thousand bucks between locking in a guy for multiple years or not. It's not like FA money is always well spent either.

If it's only a couple hundred thousand then why is a 3-4 year deal for just a couple hundred thousand more not the standard for most second round picks? It's a highly uncommon practice outside of Euro-stash's that come over. Why do you think that is if the real value is locking guys in for cheap for 3-4 years and not really about the money? Everyone can do it and yet almost nobody does it. Why is that?

Hienke was a guy that kinda started this idea not just with 2nd round picks but with undrafted guys as well. Generally speaking a lot of teams don't value their 2nd round picks enough sometimes to even guarantee them even the first year. The Clippers did 3 year deals for Evans and Thornwell last year the 3rd year is either team option or non guaranteed. Basically the way this works is you use part of the MLE instead of the vet min exception to sign the player/s. If the Wolves are planning to stay out of the tax this is a no-brainer because they aren't going to use all of the MLE anyway so the cost for this season is the same as if they signed them to a vet min deal. Does that make more sense?

Edit: I had to look up all the mechanizations of how these deals work and it was interesting. Thanks for the back and forth.

Quick Jon K summary from the latest You Betcha Basketball show with Souhan:

- All three of the guys on the podcast (Souhan, Jon K, and the TSR sponsor guy that is a season ticket holder and sits right next to the bench) believe THIS is the make or break season, meaning an 8th seed and first round exit won't be good enough. Butler and Thibs will likely be gone if it's a similar result (or worse) to last year. Probably not a shocking take....

- Jon K doesn't think a Wiggins deal is in the cards this summer. We're stuck with him for now and ultimately a lot of our hopes are tied to his development. Ugh. Just get a 3-point shot Andrew. Then I won't care so much about the anemic rebounding, handles, and passing. Hit your 3s!!!

- Jon K confirmed that KAT and Thibs/Butler have not been on the same page. About what specifically I don't know. KAT has not demanded a trade and in the end, KAT would win, meaning the franchise would get rid of Thibs/Butler before getting rid of KAT if ultimately these guys can't get in synch. KAT has all the leverage. It's kind of too bad because it makes it harder for Thibs to hold him accountable for lackluster defense.

- Tyus was dissatisfied with his playing time after he thought he proved himself worthy of increased minutes with his play throughout the bulk of the season, especially when he stepped in to start for Teague. This is another example of a bench player that was not happy. So basically our entire bench was unhappy with their playing time. I could care less about Crawford and Dieng. But Tyus and Bjelly deserved more time than they got. This is how you sabotage your chances of landing a strong free agent bench wing!

- They just assumed Rose would be resigned, but felt he would play mostly backup 2 and not necessarily cut into Tyus's playing time. I personally think what we saw of Rose in last year's playoffs was small sample size theater (he shot 70% from 3, which is unsustainable). I continue to believe he would do more harm than good for us.

- They think Thibs wants Bjelly back, but at the right price. We'll see what kind of offers he gets.

That's about it off the top of my head.

Thanks for the summary, Q. Nothing surprising.

I agree with you that signing Rose would be a mistake. That's $2 million or so in salary space that could be put to better use on someone who can hit threes (Rose never has done that consistently and therefore never will) and who can stay healthy (Rose never has).

There's some denial among fans about Thibodeau's negative impact on the team's ability to attract free agents. But Thorpe's comments ring true in light of everything else we know, including the many unhappy bench players. Heck, even Teague (a starter) was criticizing Thibs for not giving more PT to Tyus. When all those reporters say that KAT's unhappy, then you know it's true. It's totally unacceptable for a team's PBO or head coach to alienate the team's best young talent. The point is that the players around the League know they can't count on playing time as a Wolves bench player and Thibodeau is not fun to play for. They know that the team's top young allstar is unhappy.

It will be interesting to see if the Wolves can finish higher than 8th next season. The Wolves obviously won't pass Golden State in the standings. I can't see them passing Houston. The Spurs finished ahead of the Wolves without Kawhi. Next season, they'll either have Kawhi in the lineup or they'll be better because of players acquired in return for Kawhi in a trade this summer. I don't see why the Pelicans would be worse. They'll either have Counsins back in the lineup or they'll use his cap space or a sign-and-trade to improve their roster if he leaves. Portland shouldn't get worse. Utah will only get better as Mitchell enters his second season. The only team that I could see getting worse is OKC, assuming Paul George leaves. But the Nuggets will likely be better as a young team with more experience and even better if their lottery pick risk pays off. The Lakers were already better than people thought they'd be with their young guys and that was in spite of the injuries to Ball. If they land LeBron and/or Paul George then they could easily be a 45+-win team and with both would likely be a 50+ win team.

Yeah, the West is going to be BRUTAL next season.

KAT can literally GTFO if he's butting heads with Thibs and Jimmy. This team would have been a top 4 team if KAT can play any kind of good defense as the anchor, but instead the real defensive anchor in Jimmy goes down and the defense falls back to being bottom tier and we finish .500 without Jimmy. Hitching this franchise to an entitled stat stuffer is a loser move. I'm so done with KAT's ego. Anchor the defense like you are supposed to or get out. You can't win with offense only 5's. That's why nobody wants them.

khans2k5 wrote:KAT can literally GTFO if he's butting heads with Thibs and Jimmy. This team would have been a top 4 team if KAT can play any kind of good defense as the anchor, but instead the real defensive anchor in Jimmy goes down and the defense falls back to being bottom tier and we finish .500 without Jimmy. Hitching this franchise to an entitled stat stuffer is a loser move. I'm so done with KAT's ego. Anchor the defense like you are supposed to or get out. You can't win with offense only 5's. That's why nobody wants them.

I hear what you're saying, but KAT would bring in a pretty significant haul if he were put on the trading block right now. There would be a number of teams that would make a strong bid for him.