Minnesota Sports Forum

https://www.espn.com/nba/insider/story/_/id/34245668/lowe-why-kevin-durant-donovan-mitchell-mega-deals-expand-unprecedented-nba-trend

A really good and balanced article about mega deals like the Gobert trade.

Here's one of the best passages from the article that discusses the 2-star versus the 3-star model for success in relation to the Wolves Gobert deal:

Such all-in deals used to be the province of glamor market teams and one-player-away contenders. Picks don't mean as much to the glamor crew; they have an advantage luring stars in free agency, or via forced trades. The Atlanta and Minnesota deals fly in the face of that logic.

The Hawks were not quite one player away despite their 2021 conference finals run. Young is their only All-Star. What if Murray -- a free agent in 2024 barring an extension -- chafes at being a distant No. 2 option?

It seems counterintuitive given they haven't won a playoff series since 2004, but the Wolves might have been closer than Atlanta to "one-player-away" status. They had two bona fide stars in Anthony Edwards and Karl-Anthony Towns; Gobert gives them a big three -- even if he's a decade older than Edwards, who is barely starting his career

The decision to move from two stars to three can be one of the thorniest team-building moments. The choice hinges on the talent of the two in-house stars; the supporting cast; the franchise's timeline; injury risks; and other variables. The Clippers and Celtics have been content to stick with two and maintain flexibility. The Nets grabbed a third. The uniqueness of New York's pursuit of Mitchell is he would be star No. 1 -- meaning the Knicks would have fewer avenues to acquire star No. 2.

Minnesota has zero history of nabbing major free agents, so it could frame the Gobert acquisition as its version of using cap space. Still: You rarely see teams in places like Minnesota go out on this kind of limb. The Wolves are probably still outside the inner circle of contenders until Edwards makes a big leap -- by which time Gobert may be aging.

It's hard to draw a through line between all these megadeals, even if you isolate those that failed and those that hit. Garnett and Pierce were over the hill when Brooklyn mortgaged everything; the risk was obvious.

I think a key for me about the trade is that the Ant/Jaden era should be just dawning at the end of this Gobert contract. It sets the Wolves up both to win now (and they better), and give Ant/Jaden significant playoff experience before turning the team over to them. KAT should still be a star then, as well.

From that perspective, it's wasn't the all or nothing move that many view the trade, though the significant draft capital definitely puts the thumb on the win now side of things.

Sundog60 wrote:I think a key for me about the trade is that the Ant/Jaden era should be just dawning at the end of this Gobert contract. It sets the Wolves up both to win now (and they better), and give Ant/Jaden significant playoff experience before turning the team over to them. KAT should still be a star then, as well.

From that perspective, it's wasn't the all or nothing move that many view the trade, though the significant draft capital definitely puts the thumb on the win now side of things.

I completely agree with this take
I realize I may be a homer
This may blow up in our faces like all of our past misadventures
But something feels different this time
I know, I know
That's what I've always said...
But maybe, just maybe...
We have sustainable success...finally!
Beats sustainable failure..
I mean better than the KG years
Golden state used to be a waste land
The clippers too!
I realize we live in flat farm country and they do not
But maybe we have a developing top notch sports franchise on our hands
From ownership, to leadership, to coaching, to young guns, the prospects, the rising stars, the older vets, the solid bench players, all the different type of roll players, to our all decade starting front court.
Me thinks this puzzle fits well together...
I think we have a team!
Or....do I need to wake up?
It's ok, you can burst my bubble....

WallyWorld wrote:

Sundog60 wrote:I think a key for me about the trade is that the Ant/Jaden era should be just dawning at the end of this Gobert contract. It sets the Wolves up both to win now (and they better), and give Ant/Jaden significant playoff experience before turning the team over to them. KAT should still be a star then, as well.

From that perspective, it's wasn't the all or nothing move that many view the trade, though the significant draft capital definitely puts the thumb on the win now side of things.

I completely agree with this take
I realize I may be a homer
This may blow up in our faces like all of our past misadventures
But something feels different this time
I know, I know
That's what I've always said...
But maybe, just maybe...
We have sustainable success...finally!
Beats sustainable failure..
I mean better than the KG years
Golden state used to be a waste land
The clippers too!
I realize we live in flat farm country and they do not
But maybe we have a developing top notch sports franchise on our hands
From ownership, to leadership, to coaching, to young guns, the prospects, the rising stars, the older vets, the solid bench players, all the different type of roll players, to our all decade starting front court.
Me thinks this puzzle fits well together...
I think we have a team!
Or....do I need to wake up?
It's ok, you can burst my bubble....

Wally - You're obviously a poet. Well done.

Here's an article recently posted:

Danny Ainge is not quite about to get chased around with pitchforks at his local grocery store, but opposing teams are definitely not happy with the Utah Jazz right now.

ESPN's Brian Windhorst said this week on "The Hoop Collective" that many rival teams are complaining about what Utah's trade of Rudy Gobert to the Minnesota Timberwolves did to the market.

"Danny Ainge has moved the game on winning deals," said Windhorst. "He reset that ... What he got for Gobert, everyone in the league is b---ing about, like, 'Can you believe it? Can you believe it? How can they possibly do that?' I've talked to ten different people who have b---ed to me about that trade."

Utah's haul for Gobert was indeed preposterous. In exchange for sending the former Defensive Player of the Year to Minnesota, the Jazz got Patrick Beverley, Malik Beasley, and Jarred Vanderbilt (three starting-caliber guys) as well as Leandro Bolmaro and five (yes, five) first-round picks (2022 first-rounder Walker Kessler plus four future firsts). That is an absurd return for a 30-year-old Gobert and has really screwed over buyers in the market (such as any teams interested in trading for Brooklyn Nets star Kevin Durant).

The Jazz do not appear to have any remorse either as they recently tried to shake another team dry in a potential trade for Donovan Mitchell. While rivals complain, Utah is probably laughing all the way to the asset bank.

I copied the article into this thread just to make sure we all realize that D-Loser isn't the only one who thinks the Wolves got taken to the cleaners by the Jazz. There's no question that almost the entire basketball world thinks the Wolves grossly overpaid to get Gobert. I heard someone recently who actually likes the deal for the Wolves concede that the Wolves paid $20 million for a $10 million house. His take-away is that the Wolves nonetheless have a $10 million house. I'm not quite as down on this deal as D-Lower, but I still think it was the wrong deal at the wrong time. And I believe Ainge got away with some form of larceny. As I've written many times, if the Wolves suddenly decided to put Gobert on the market now, would any other team in the League give us three starters, a first-round pick from this year's draft and four future unprotected first-round picks all the way out to 2029? Obviously, we can't answer that question definitively, but I'm confident the answer is no.

lipoli390 wrote:Here's an article recently posted:

Danny Ainge is not quite about to get chased around with pitchforks at his local grocery store, but opposing teams are definitely not happy with the Utah Jazz right now.

ESPN's Brian Windhorst said this week on "The Hoop Collective" that many rival teams are complaining about what Utah's trade of Rudy Gobert to the Minnesota Timberwolves did to the market.

"Danny Ainge has moved the game on winning deals," said Windhorst. "He reset that ... What he got for Gobert, everyone in the league is b---ing about, like, 'Can you believe it? Can you believe it? How can they possibly do that?' I've talked to ten different people who have b---ed to me about that trade."

Utah's haul for Gobert was indeed preposterous. In exchange for sending the former Defensive Player of the Year to Minnesota, the Jazz got Patrick Beverley, Malik Beasley, and Jarred Vanderbilt (three starting-caliber guys) as well as Leandro Bolmaro and five (yes, five) first-round picks (2022 first-rounder Walker Kessler plus four future firsts). That is an absurd return for a 30-year-old Gobert and has really screwed over buyers in the market (such as any teams interested in trading for Brooklyn Nets star Kevin Durant).

The Jazz do not appear to have any remorse either as they recently tried to shake another team dry in a potential trade for Donovan Mitchell. While rivals complain, Utah is probably laughing all the way to the asset bank.

I copied the article into this thread just to make sure we all realize that D-Loser isn't the only one who thinks the Wolves got taken to the cleaners by the Jazz. There's no question that almost the entire basketball world thinks the Wolves grossly overpaid to get Gobert. I heard someone recently who actually likes the deal for the Wolves concede that the Wolves paid $20 million for a $10 million house. His take-away is that the Wolves nonetheless have a $10 million house. I'm not quite as down on this deal as D-Lower, but I still think it was the wrong deal at the wrong time. And I believe Ainge got away with some form of larceny. As I've written many times, if the Wolves suddenly decided to put Gobert on the market now, would any other team in the League give us three starters, a first-round pick from this year's draft and four future unprotected first-round picks all the way out to 2029? Obviously, we can't answer that question definitively, but I'm confident the answer is no.

Has there been a big trade like this where the receiving team didn't get a long term starter? I think that's where the picks come in. Typically the receiving team gets a McDaniels type. Utah didn't. Meanwhile the Wolves to some extent are like damn we got our guy and we were able to keep the players that we really wanted.

lipoli390 wrote:Here's an article recently posted:

Danny Ainge is not quite about to get chased around with pitchforks at his local grocery store, but opposing teams are definitely not happy with the Utah Jazz right now.

ESPN's Brian Windhorst said this week on "The Hoop Collective" that many rival teams are complaining about what Utah's trade of Rudy Gobert to the Minnesota Timberwolves did to the market.

"Danny Ainge has moved the game on winning deals," said Windhorst. "He reset that ... What he got for Gobert, everyone in the league is b---ing about, like, 'Can you believe it? Can you believe it? How can they possibly do that?' I've talked to ten different people who have b---ed to me about that trade."

Utah's haul for Gobert was indeed preposterous. In exchange for sending the former Defensive Player of the Year to Minnesota, the Jazz got Patrick Beverley, Malik Beasley, and Jarred Vanderbilt (three starting-caliber guys) as well as Leandro Bolmaro and five (yes, five) first-round picks (2022 first-rounder Walker Kessler plus four future firsts). That is an absurd return for a 30-year-old Gobert and has really screwed over buyers in the market (such as any teams interested in trading for Brooklyn Nets star Kevin Durant).

The Jazz do not appear to have any remorse either as they recently tried to shake another team dry in a potential trade for Donovan Mitchell. While rivals complain, Utah is probably laughing all the way to the asset bank.

I copied the article into this thread just to make sure we all realize that D-Loser isn't the only one who thinks the Wolves got taken to the cleaners by the Jazz. There's no question that almost the entire basketball world thinks the Wolves grossly overpaid to get Gobert. I heard someone recently who actually likes the deal for the Wolves concede that the Wolves paid $20 million for a $10 million house. His take-away is that the Wolves nonetheless have a $10 million house. I'm not quite as down on this deal as D-Lower, but I still think it was the wrong deal at the wrong time. And I believe Ainge got away with some form of larceny. As I've written many times, if the Wolves suddenly decided to put Gobert on the market now, would any other team in the League give us three starters, a first-round pick from this year's draft and four future unprotected first-round picks all the way out to 2029? Obviously, we can't answer that question definitively, but I'm confident the answer is no.

I can understand where most of those around the league are coming from, as it was indeed a kings ransom, especially when compared to deals that came before it.

But Beverley, for all he is worth to a team when he's healthy on the court, also seems to be a negative at end of games in crunch time, making very debatable decisions...I don't know if the advanced statistics back me up on this....

And Beasley, he's either on raining 3's, or should be watching from the sidelines on his all to frequent off nights....I'd so much rather have a player that consistently hits three 3's per game rather then 6 one game and zero on another. Especially in someone whom doesn't offer much more other then some rebounding and some intensity

And Vanderbilt: he was the battery that ran the team....that battery wore out through out the season....can he maintain it for 82 games and a deep run in the playoffs?

Not to mention what we had to give up to get these players in the first place? I think we could acquire this type of talent with out large cost. They aren't replacement players, but on most days they are replacement level starters.

I see the general bias of over looking these facts by the media. As these were all limitations everyone was talking about before they were traded.

We traded that for Gobert
We traded that for how he fits on this team hypothetically
We lost a boat load of draft picks, that's the opportunity cost
If we can maintain success and restock the shelves with young developing talent and get players like SloMo and Prince going forward, what will those draft picks really amount too?

For every Jaden...hopefully
For every Minott....please please please
There is always many more Ndudi Ebi

I bet on talent
I also hope we have a top notch talent evaluator
And I hope it wasn't all Calvin Booths doing...Ive read he has a great eye for talent...

WallyWorld wrote:

lipoli390 wrote:Here's an article recently posted:

Danny Ainge is not quite about to get chased around with pitchforks at his local grocery store, but opposing teams are definitely not happy with the Utah Jazz right now.

ESPN's Brian Windhorst said this week on "The Hoop Collective" that many rival teams are complaining about what Utah's trade of Rudy Gobert to the Minnesota Timberwolves did to the market.

"Danny Ainge has moved the game on winning deals," said Windhorst. "He reset that ... What he got for Gobert, everyone in the league is b---ing about, like, 'Can you believe it? Can you believe it? How can they possibly do that?' I've talked to ten different people who have b---ed to me about that trade."

Utah's haul for Gobert was indeed preposterous. In exchange for sending the former Defensive Player of the Year to Minnesota, the Jazz got Patrick Beverley, Malik Beasley, and Jarred Vanderbilt (three starting-caliber guys) as well as Leandro Bolmaro and five (yes, five) first-round picks (2022 first-rounder Walker Kessler plus four future firsts). That is an absurd return for a 30-year-old Gobert and has really screwed over buyers in the market (such as any teams interested in trading for Brooklyn Nets star Kevin Durant).

The Jazz do not appear to have any remorse either as they recently tried to shake another team dry in a potential trade for Donovan Mitchell. While rivals complain, Utah is probably laughing all the way to the asset bank.

I copied the article into this thread just to make sure we all realize that D-Loser isn't the only one who thinks the Wolves got taken to the cleaners by the Jazz. There's no question that almost the entire basketball world thinks the Wolves grossly overpaid to get Gobert. I heard someone recently who actually likes the deal for the Wolves concede that the Wolves paid $20 million for a $10 million house. His take-away is that the Wolves nonetheless have a $10 million house. I'm not quite as down on this deal as D-Lower, but I still think it was the wrong deal at the wrong time. And I believe Ainge got away with some form of larceny. As I've written many times, if the Wolves suddenly decided to put Gobert on the market now, would any other team in the League give us three starters, a first-round pick from this year's draft and four future unprotected first-round picks all the way out to 2029? Obviously, we can't answer that question definitively, but I'm confident the answer is no.

I can understand where most of those around the league are coming from, as it was indeed a kings ransom, especially when compared to deals that came before it.

But Beverley, for all he is worth to a team when he's healthy on the court, also seems to be a negative at end of games in crunch time, making very debatable decisions...I don't know if the advanced statistics back me up on this....

And Beasley, he's either on raining 3's, or should be watching from the sidelines on his all to frequent off nights....I'd so much rather have a player that consistently hits three 3's per game rather then 6 one game and zero on another. Especially in someone whom doesn't offer much more other then some rebounding and some intensity

And Vanderbilt: he was the battery that ran the team....that battery wore out through out the season....can he maintain it for 82 games and a deep run in the playoffs?

Not to mention what we had to give up to get these players in the first place? I think we could acquire this type of talent with out large cost. They aren't replacement players, but on most days they are replacement level starters.

I see the general bias of over looking these facts by the media. As these were all limitations everyone was talking about before they were traded.

We traded that for Gobert
We traded that for how he fits on this team hypothetically
We lost a boat load of draft picks, that's the opportunity cost
If we can maintain success and restock the shelves with young developing talent and get players like SloMo and Prince going forward, what will those draft picks really amount too?

For every Jaden...hopefully
For every Minott....please please please
There is always many more Ndudi Ebi

I bet on talent
I also hope we have a top notch talent evaluator
And I hope it wasn't all Calvin Booths doing...Ive read he has a great eye for talent...

Good observations, Wally.

I also read what you read about Booth's eye for talent. One NBA scout referred to Booth as the best talent evaluator he's ever known. I remember watching a movie when I was a boy about this great heart surgeon. He was world-renown and rich as a result. One day he was in the middle of operating when his long-time assisting surgeon was unexpectedly called away. He pleaded with his #2 to stay, but the #2 said he had to leave and he reminded the famous surgeon that the procedure they were doing was a relatively simple. The patient died after the surgery. There was an investigation and it turned out that the famous surgeon was a fraud and it was the genius of his #2 that made him rich and famous.

Could this be the Connelly-Booth story? Connelly traded the draft rights to Gobert on draft day for nothing. He later traded the rights to Donovan Mitchell for Tres Lyle I think. Yes, he picked Jamal Murray at #7, but that was a no-brainer pick. I believe Booth was there for the Monte Morris, Hyland and Michael Porter Jr. picks. Hmm. So it comes down to the Jokic pick. Maybe Connelly just got luckily with him. Maybe he just likes big white guys, witness his Nurkic and Kessler picks. Or maybe Denver had a great European scout at the time. Connelly's about culture; maybe that's all he's about. Wild speculation on my part. But what if it's true? That would mean that Connelly wasn't nearly as fleeced by Ainge as Lore and A-Rod were by Connelly. :) OK, time for bed.

lipoli390 wrote:

WallyWorld wrote:

lipoli390 wrote:Here's an article recently posted:

Danny Ainge is not quite about to get chased around with pitchforks at his local grocery store, but opposing teams are definitely not happy with the Utah Jazz right now.

ESPN's Brian Windhorst said this week on "The Hoop Collective" that many rival teams are complaining about what Utah's trade of Rudy Gobert to the Minnesota Timberwolves did to the market.

"Danny Ainge has moved the game on winning deals," said Windhorst. "He reset that ... What he got for Gobert, everyone in the league is b---ing about, like, 'Can you believe it? Can you believe it? How can they possibly do that?' I've talked to ten different people who have b---ed to me about that trade."

Utah's haul for Gobert was indeed preposterous. In exchange for sending the former Defensive Player of the Year to Minnesota, the Jazz got Patrick Beverley, Malik Beasley, and Jarred Vanderbilt (three starting-caliber guys) as well as Leandro Bolmaro and five (yes, five) first-round picks (2022 first-rounder Walker Kessler plus four future firsts). That is an absurd return for a 30-year-old Gobert and has really screwed over buyers in the market (such as any teams interested in trading for Brooklyn Nets star Kevin Durant).

The Jazz do not appear to have any remorse either as they recently tried to shake another team dry in a potential trade for Donovan Mitchell. While rivals complain, Utah is probably laughing all the way to the asset bank.

I copied the article into this thread just to make sure we all realize that D-Loser isn't the only one who thinks the Wolves got taken to the cleaners by the Jazz. There's no question that almost the entire basketball world thinks the Wolves grossly overpaid to get Gobert. I heard someone recently who actually likes the deal for the Wolves concede that the Wolves paid $20 million for a $10 million house. His take-away is that the Wolves nonetheless have a $10 million house. I'm not quite as down on this deal as D-Lower, but I still think it was the wrong deal at the wrong time. And I believe Ainge got away with some form of larceny. As I've written many times, if the Wolves suddenly decided to put Gobert on the market now, would any other team in the League give us three starters, a first-round pick from this year's draft and four future unprotected first-round picks all the way out to 2029? Obviously, we can't answer that question definitively, but I'm confident the answer is no.

I can understand where most of those around the league are coming from, as it was indeed a kings ransom, especially when compared to deals that came before it.

But Beverley, for all he is worth to a team when he's healthy on the court, also seems to be a negative at end of games in crunch time, making very debatable decisions...I don't know if the advanced statistics back me up on this....

And Beasley, he's either on raining 3's, or should be watching from the sidelines on his all to frequent off nights....I'd so much rather have a player that consistently hits three 3's per game rather then 6 one game and zero on another. Especially in someone whom doesn't offer much more other then some rebounding and some intensity

And Vanderbilt: he was the battery that ran the team....that battery wore out through out the season....can he maintain it for 82 games and a deep run in the playoffs?

Not to mention what we had to give up to get these players in the first place? I think we could acquire this type of talent with out large cost. They aren't replacement players, but on most days they are replacement level starters.

I see the general bias of over looking these facts by the media. As these were all limitations everyone was talking about before they were traded.

We traded that for Gobert
We traded that for how he fits on this team hypothetically
We lost a boat load of draft picks, that's the opportunity cost
If we can maintain success and restock the shelves with young developing talent and get players like SloMo and Prince going forward, what will those draft picks really amount too?

For every Jaden...hopefully
For every Minott....please please please
There is always many more Ndudi Ebi

I bet on talent
I also hope we have a top notch talent evaluator
And I hope it wasn't all Calvin Booths doing...Ive read he has a great eye for talent...

Good observations, Wally.

I also read what you read about Booth's eye for talent. One NBA scout referred to Booth as the best talent evaluator he's ever known. I remember watching a movie when I was a boy about this great heart surgeon. He was world-renown and rich as a result. One day he was in the middle of operating when his long-time assisting surgeon was unexpectedly called away. He pleaded with his #2 to stay, but the #2 said he had to leave and he reminded the famous surgeon that the procedure they were doing was a relatively simple. The patient died after the surgery. There was an investigation and it turned out that the famous surgeon was a fraud and it was the genius of his #2 that made him rich and famous.

Could this be the Connelly-Booth story? Connelly traded the draft rights to Gobert on draft day for nothing. He later traded the rights to Donovan Mitchell for Tres Lyle I think. Yes, he picked Jamal Murray at #7, but that was a no-brainer pick. I believe Booth was there for the Monte Morris, Hyland and Michael Porter Jr. picks. Hmm. So it comes down to the Jokic pick. Maybe Connelly just got luckily with him. Maybe he just likes big white guys, witness his Nurkic and Kessler picks. Or maybe Denver had a great European scout at the time. Connelly's about culture; maybe that's all he's about. Wild speculation on my part. But what if it's true? That would mean that Connelly wasn't nearly as fleeced by Ainge as Lore and A-Rod were by Connelly. :) OK, time for bed.

Connelly clearly wasn't acting alone but that doesn't mean he doesn't have the eye for talent. The Bulls current GM was a Connelly guy also. One skill of being the top sports executive is having an eye for talent around you and then listening to and utilizing those guys. Josh Minott looks like a guy that shows Connelly and other with the Wolves have an eye for talent.