Minnesota Sports Forum

Monster - We definitely end up in the same place. Exactly how much room the Wolves have under the luxury tax remains a bit of a mystery to me. Spotrac has the salaries for all 11 players under contract. The total is $127,379,143. That number matches the total from Hoopshype after adjusting for the Beverly trade. 2-way contracts don't count. Based on that total, the Wolves should be about $9.2M under the luxury tax if they don't sign Bolmaro and renounce their cap holds/qualifying offers on Vanderbilt and JMac. Add Bolmaro's contract and the Wolves would be $6.85M under the luxury tax. Add Vanderbilt's $2.08M qualifying offer and the Wolves would be $4.77M under the luxury tax. Then add JMac's $1.49M qualifying offer and the luxury tax room falls to $3.28M. Of course, if the Wolves actually sign Vanderbilt and/or JMac to a multi-year deal, it will likely involve a 2021-22 salary higher than the qualifying offer. The likely result would be just enough to fill our final roster spot with a minimum salary vet at no more than $2M.

But Spotrac has a line item for "total taxable salaries" at $129,409,586. I can't figure out where that number came from. It doesn't reflect any of the cap holds or any other number I can find among the salaries and cap holds listed on that site or any other. If this is the actual number, then the Wolves are only around $4.8M under the luxury tax threshold after signing Bolmaro. That would be just enough to sign Vanderbilt and maybe enough to either sign JMac or a minimum salary vet, but not both.

So I'm a bit confused. However, bottom line is that we can sign Millsap, Hartenstein or any other free agent we've discussed without a salary-clearing deal. I think Layman and his $3.9M contract would be the logical player to move. He's a capable NBA-level player on a cheap expiring deal. So I don't think he'd be hard to move for a non-guaranteed or minimum-salary contract, especially if we attached one of our three 2022 second-round picks. If I were Rosas, I'd stop thinking about acquiring Simmons and focus on signing Vanderbilt and clearing space to sign either Millsap or Hartenstein. And I think that means finding a team that would be open to swapping a non-guaranteed or minimum contract player for Layman and our Philly-Denver 2nd-round pick.

lipoli390 wrote:Monster - We definitely end up in the same place. Exactly how much room the Wolves have under the luxury tax remains a bit of a mystery to me. Spotrac has the salaries for all 11 players under contract. The total is $127,379,143. That number matches the total from Hoopshype after adjusting for the Beverly trade. 2-way contracts don't count. Based on that total, the Wolves should be about $9.2M under the luxury tax if they don't sign Bolmaro and renounce their cap holds/qualifying offers on Vanderbilt and JMac. Add Bolmaro's contract and the Wolves would be $6.85M under the luxury tax. Add Vanderbilt's $2.08M qualifying offer and the Wolves would be $4.77M under the luxury tax. Then add JMac's $1.49M qualifying offer and the luxury tax room falls to $3.28M. Of course, if the Wolves actually sign Vanderbilt and/or JMac to a multi-year deal, it will likely involve a 2021-22 salary higher than the qualifying offer. The likely result would be just enough to fill our final roster spot with a minimum salary vet at no more than $2M.

But Spotrac has a line item for "total taxable salaries" at $129,409,586. I can't figure out where that number came from. It doesn't reflect any of the cap holds or any other number I can find among the salaries and cap holds listed on that site or any other. If this is the actual number, then the Wolves are only around $4.8M under the luxury tax threshold after signing Bolmaro. That would be just enough to sign Vanderbilt and maybe enough to either sign JMac or a minimum salary vet, but not both.

So I'm a bit confused. However, bottom line is that we can sign Millsap, Hartenstein or any other free agent we've discussed without a salary-clearing deal. I think Layman and his $3.9M contract would be the logical player to move. He's a capable NBA-level player on a cheap expiring deal. So I don't think he'd be hard to move for a non-guaranteed or minimum-salary contract, especially if we attached one of our three 2022 second-round picks. If I were Rosas, I'd stop thinking about acquiring Simmons and focus on signing Vanderbilt and clearing space to sign either Millsap or Hartenstein. And I think that means finding a team that would be open to swapping a non-guaranteed or minimum contract player for Layman and our Philly-Denver 2nd-round pick.

Basketball insiders has McLaughlin with a Qualifying offer at almost 1.7 million so that's a couple hundred thousand. I think that number makes more sense than the 1.5 million as McLaughlin has 2 years of service time in the league.

I wouldn't make a trade involving a 2nd rounder just to sign Hartenstein and I think I would have said that before you bringing up reports of his possible attitude issues. Of course if we really could move Layman for the Sixers/nugget pick and that meant we got Hartenstein and still had some space to sign another player later either now or later or wiggle room in trades then that would be cool with me.

Honestly at this point I just want Vanderbilt and McLaughlin resigned and I'm ready to roll with this season. I wouldn't be surprised if a minor tweak to the roster still comes before the season starts.

Layman is another guy that is just so frustrating. Like Okogie, he is a reliable catch-and-shoot 3-ball away from being a super valuable role player. Although he doesn't physically look the part, he's actually a pretty good team defender. And we all know how great of a cutter he is, something he could exploit even more if he could shoot.

So frustrating how fucking hard it's been for this franchise to find guys that can shoot without being disasters on defense. It's been a chronic problem for a decade now. McDaniels and Beverley are very rare exceptions and two reasons I'm a bit more hopeful for the upcoming season.

It should be noted and remembered that Minnesota can [and should] go over the luxury tax threshold if they need to in order to sign a potential difference-maker -- like a Paul Millsap. They would have to be under that threshold by the end of the regular season in order to avoid penalties. This means that Minnesota could shed payroll at the deadline or with buyouts before the season's end to get them back under the luxury tax threshold. It does not have to be by the season's start or anything like that.

There will be multiple ways to get under, especially if they're only over by a million or two. I would expect the Wolves to continue to be active in trade talks and have the pieces necessary to facilitate other trades if not their own that could be an option to shed money. They've already shown an ability this off-season to be financially savvy and still upgrade the roster despite the little room to work with under that threshold.

By my calculations, the Wolves could sign Millsap, Jarred Vanderbilt, and Jordan McLaughlin to figures I've suggested in the past and would exceed the luxury tax threshold by two-million. How they shed that two-million is of little importance to me as it could easily be a buyout of Jake Layman or simply attaching a second-round pick to him and having Oklahoma City absorb him into their cap space. I think most of us would be fine with trading Layman and a second for Millsap right now. That move doesn't have to prelude signing the veteran big or another big that I haven't named.

It's seems really backward to me that this franchise should even be flirting with the luxury tax. We all know the reasons why, but if I'm the owner and you deliver me 34 wins, I better not see you even close to the tax line. You go over the tax when you're in a big market, or you're planning on having 10-12 extra home games during the playoffs. You don't do it to simply fill out your roster when you are a mediocre team at best. We should be looking to reduce salary before we add any 37 year old has-beens who won't be able to play every night.

I've read a lot of discussion about Paul Milsap, and I wonder if it's just board talk or if there have been rumors that we are interested and in the picture. I see Milsap linked to all sorts of teams, but not us. Most of them are playoff contenders, and since he has never won an NBA championship, I would guess that would be his top priority.

Obviously I would love to add Milsap. Even at age 35 he has been in the top 10 DRPM for power forwards the past two seasons. But does anyone know of any mutual interest, or is this just a fantasy?

FNG wrote:I've read a lot of discussion about Paul Milsap, and I wonder if it's just board talk or if there have been rumors that we are interested and in the picture. I see Milsap linked to all sorts of teams, but not us. Most of them are playoff contenders, and since he has never won an NBA championship, I would guess that would be his top priority.

Obviously I would love to add Milsap. Even at age 35 he has been in the top 10 DRPM for power forwards the past two seasons. But does anyone know of any mutual interest, or is this just a fantasy?

It's been reported by all the local guys that Minnesota has inquired about Paul Millsap, but that talks were far from finished. They've remained interested. I haven't seen anything about any formal offers being made to Millsap, but that goes for more teams than just the Wolves.

What we do know is that Millsap was rumored to be interested in the Warriors and the Hawks for the tax-payer mid-level exception -- a deal that maxes out at $5.9-million next year. Obviously, those teams have incumbent starters at Millsap's position and would unlikely be willing to give him a second year. All of this leads me to believe that a younger, very talented team wanting his veteran presence in the starting lineup and could offer him multiple years would interest him.

CoolBreeze44 wrote:It's seems really backward to me that this franchise should even be flirting with the luxury tax. We all know the reasons why, but if I'm the owner and you deliver me 34 wins, I better not see you even close to the tax line. You go over the tax when you're in a big market, or you're planning on having 10-12 extra home games during the playoffs. You don't do it to simply fill out your roster when you are a mediocre team at best. We should be looking to reduce salary before we add any 37 year old has-beens who won't be able to play every night.

For what it's worth, Paul Millsap has played over 50 regular season games the last three years -- including the shortened 2019-2020 and 2020-2021 seasons -- and has been a positive player at a position the Wolves sorely need help at. I would be thrilled with 50 games of Millsap next to Karl-Anthony Towns.

As for the luxury tax, what are you supposed to expect as an owner? Talent has a price. This front office inherited two max contracts. Were they supposed to let Malik Beasley walk in free agency? Should they have traded the number one pick because its salary slot exceeds 10-million annually? All of these things add up. How on earth does this team get better if they're operating under the circumstances of "don't even flirt with the luxury tax" when they were way above the soft cap to start with? As an owner, you'd have two options -- tell your front office to get better and start winning, or blow it up and shed payroll regardless of what it costs. What do you want them to do?

Camden wrote:

FNG wrote:I've read a lot of discussion about Paul Milsap, and I wonder if it's just board talk or if there have been rumors that we are interested and in the picture. I see Milsap linked to all sorts of teams, but not us. Most of them are playoff contenders, and since he has never won an NBA championship, I would guess that would be his top priority.

Obviously I would love to add Milsap. Even at age 35 he has been in the top 10 DRPM for power forwards the past two seasons. But does anyone know of any mutual interest, or is this just a fantasy?

It's been reported by all the local guys that Minnesota has inquired about Paul Millsap, but that talks were far from finished. They've remained interested. I haven't seen anything about any formal offers being made to Millsap, but that goes for more teams than just the Wolves.

What we do know is that Millsap was rumored to be interested in the Warriors and the Hawks for the tax-payer mid-level exception -- a deal that maxes out at $5.9-million next year. Obviously, those teams have incumbent starters at Millsap's position and would unlikely be willing to give him a second year. All of this leads me to believe that a younger, very talented team wanting his veteran presence in the starting lineup and could offer him multiple years would interest him.

Thanks Cam...I hadn't seen that, but I'm glad Rosas is smart enough to go after a guy like Milsap. I'd love to add him to this roster.

Camden wrote:

CoolBreeze44 wrote:It's seems really backward to me that this franchise should even be flirting with the luxury tax. We all know the reasons why, but if I'm the owner and you deliver me 34 wins, I better not see you even close to the tax line. You go over the tax when you're in a big market, or you're planning on having 10-12 extra home games during the playoffs. You don't do it to simply fill out your roster when you are a mediocre team at best. We should be looking to reduce salary before we add any 37 year old has-beens who won't be able to play every night.

For what it's worth, Paul Millsap has played over 50 regular season games the last three years -- including the shortened 2019-2020 and 2020-2021 seasons -- and has been a positive player at a position the Wolves sorely need help at. I would be thrilled with 50 games of Millsap next to Karl-Anthony Towns.

As for the luxury tax, what are you supposed to expect as an owner? Talent has a price. This front office inherited two max contracts. Were they supposed to let Malik Beasley walk in free agency? Should they have traded the number one pick because its salary slot exceeds 10-million annually? All of these things add up. How on earth does this team get better if they're operating under the circumstances of "don't even flirt with the luxury tax" when they were way above the soft cap to start with? As an owner, you'd have two options -- tell your front office to get better and start winning, or blow it up and shed payroll regardless of what it costs. What do you want them to do?

As an owner when I hire Rosas, I ask him whether he can win with what he has. If he says yes, he better not deliver 34 wins. If he says no, I give him some rope to shape things the way he would like them, but he would be directed to shed salary. I feel like I'm repeating myself here, but he would not be allowed to spend near the tax line and deliver mediocrity. That's just business 101. Paul Milsap is not going to get us into the top 4 of the West. He may not mean anything in terms of wins and losses. I have nothing against Milsap as a player, but we should stay away and he should chase a ring. Now if ownership decides they can't live without him, as a fan I say go for it, it's not my money. But I was speaking from an owner's perspective.