Minnesota Sports Forum

CoolBreeze44 wrote:

khans2k5 wrote:

CoolBreeze44 wrote:

khans2k5 wrote:The way I see it we are two years away from the luxury tax and if we don't make the playoffs they definitely won't be okay with spending luxury tax money. The money is available now and guys can be traded later if ownership decides they aren't willing to go into the tax. I think you just end up killing your team anyway if you are worried about going into the tax so you never make a team good enough to warrant it.

If it's a contract you as an organization don't want to keep, chances are you're not going to be able to trade it either. Luol Deng is a Laker until that contract either runs out or is an expiring.

It's only untradeable if the guy is garbage and I don't think guys who have been good for almost a decade will end up as completely unplayable in just 2-3 years. Good players can be traded almost regardless. Joe Johnson was traded on an untradeable contract to the Nets. Rudy Gay was traded on an untradeable contract to the Kings. There will always be teams like the Nets and the Kings that will make a trade for an overpaid guy to help short term goals.

I tell you what. Here are 5 guys I would consider untradeable at this point:

Chanlder Parsons
Nicolas Batum
Luol Deng
Allen Crabbe
Evan Fournier

Let's see if just one of those guys gets traded before their expiration year.

I think Fournier has value... even at $17M for another 4 years.

He was on a badly managed, mish-mashed Orlando team and battled injuries last season... but he averaged 17+ ppg. He's a career 38% 3fg and is only 24 years old.

AbeVigodaLive wrote:

CoolBreeze44 wrote:

khans2k5 wrote:

CoolBreeze44 wrote:

khans2k5 wrote:The way I see it we are two years away from the luxury tax and if we don't make the playoffs they definitely won't be okay with spending luxury tax money. The money is available now and guys can be traded later if ownership decides they aren't willing to go into the tax. I think you just end up killing your team anyway if you are worried about going into the tax so you never make a team good enough to warrant it.

If it's a contract you as an organization don't want to keep, chances are you're not going to be able to trade it either. Luol Deng is a Laker until that contract either runs out or is an expiring.

It's only untradeable if the guy is garbage and I don't think guys who have been good for almost a decade will end up as completely unplayable in just 2-3 years. Good players can be traded almost regardless. Joe Johnson was traded on an untradeable contract to the Nets. Rudy Gay was traded on an untradeable contract to the Kings. There will always be teams like the Nets and the Kings that will make a trade for an overpaid guy to help short term goals.

I tell you what. Here are 5 guys I would consider untradeable at this point:

Chanlder Parsons
Nicolas Batum
Luol Deng
Allen Crabbe
Evan Fournier

Let's see if just one of those guys gets traded before their expiration year.

I think Fournier has value... even at $17M for another 4 years.

He was on a badly managed, mish-mashed Orlando team and battled injuries last season... but he averaged 17+ ppg. He's a career 38% 3fg and is only 24 years old.

I agree with Abe on Fournier.

If the Nets could trade for him they would take Crabbe in a heartbeat. He was actually even more efficient this year than the previous year. TS% over 60% for a wing sounds pretty good. I think Evan Turner's contract is much harder to move, was a bigger mistake and is a more cautionary tale.

kekgeek1 wrote:

CoolBreeze44 wrote:I guess it depends on the willingness ownership has to go into the luxury tax. If they are dead set against it, than no, I don't want to add Milsap or Ibaka for a max contract. If they are committed to paying whatever it takes, then by all means spend the money you have today and don't worry about tomorrow. Just remember how many of these mega contracts given to 30ish year old players do not work out.

I think that is fair.

If signing Millsap interferes with keeping lavine than it is a bad move and not because Milsap is a bad player but I would be shocked if the wolves are legit title contenders with him in the next couple of years.

Now people will respond well that is dumb glen needs to pay the lux tax but it is a legit concern to take into consideration.

I would rather have wiggins/towns/lavine for 7 years (with the option to trade any of them in their prime) than Milsap/wiggins/towns

I very much agree with this conclusion, and unencumbered by any inside knowledge at all, I sense this is Thibs' take too. I think that is the primary reason he didn't overpay for a high-priced free agent last offseason, and why I think he is unlikely to do otherwise this offseason. Keeping the Big 3 (and putting some serviceable players around them) will already put the Wolves into the lux tax (and the good news is I now believe ownership is willing to pay some lux tax if it means being competitive...just not a ridiculous amount), but signing a high priced player this off season certainly means one of the Big 3 will be "Hardened" in the next couple years. I don't want that. A better plan is this:

1) Be patient and wait to see if the Big 3 can reach their enormous potential, and leave enough dry powder to be able to retain all of them without going too deep into the lux

2) Sign a couple cheap vet free agents who can provide some defense, leadership and toughness

And finally, and this is for Thibs:

3) Actully PLAY those free agents

My prediction is that management will follow the strategy in 1 and 2. Whether 3 happens is up to the coach.

monsterpile wrote:

AbeVigodaLive wrote:

CoolBreeze44 wrote:

khans2k5 wrote:

CoolBreeze44 wrote:

khans2k5 wrote:The way I see it we are two years away from the luxury tax and if we don't make the playoffs they definitely won't be okay with spending luxury tax money. The money is available now and guys can be traded later if ownership decides they aren't willing to go into the tax. I think you just end up killing your team anyway if you are worried about going into the tax so you never make a team good enough to warrant it.

If it's a contract you as an organization don't want to keep, chances are you're not going to be able to trade it either. Luol Deng is a Laker until that contract either runs out or is an expiring.

It's only untradeable if the guy is garbage and I don't think guys who have been good for almost a decade will end up as completely unplayable in just 2-3 years. Good players can be traded almost regardless. Joe Johnson was traded on an untradeable contract to the Nets. Rudy Gay was traded on an untradeable contract to the Kings. There will always be teams like the Nets and the Kings that will make a trade for an overpaid guy to help short term goals.

I tell you what. Here are 5 guys I would consider untradeable at this point:

Chanlder Parsons
Nicolas Batum
Luol Deng
Allen Crabbe
Evan Fournier

Let's see if just one of those guys gets traded before their expiration year.

I think Fournier has value... even at $17M for another 4 years.

He was on a badly managed, mish-mashed Orlando team and battled injuries last season... but he averaged 17+ ppg. He's a career 38% 3fg and is only 24 years old.

I agree with Abe on Fournier.

If the Nets could trade for him they would take Crabbe in a heartbeat. He was actually even more efficient this year than the previous year. TS% over 60% for a wing sounds pretty good. I think Evan Turner's contract is much harder to move, was a bigger mistake and is a more cautionary tale.

You might be right on that monster

https://twitter.com/brittrobson/status/867051420268285953

Fun fact: Total cost to Spurs for Dedmon/Lee/K Anderson/Simmons/Bertans this season--$8.3 million. Patty Mills only $3.2 mil on top of that

monsterpile wrote:https://twitter.com/brittrobson/status/867051420268285953

Fun fact: Total cost to Spurs for Dedmon/Lee/K Anderson/Simmons/Bertans this season--$8.3 million. Patty Mills only $3.2 mil on top of that

See, that's the key - finding contributors that don't break the bank. Unfortunately in the Spurs case a lot of it comes down to culture, and we aren't there yet.

longstrangetrip wrote:

kekgeek1 wrote:

CoolBreeze44 wrote:I guess it depends on the willingness ownership has to go into the luxury tax. If they are dead set against it, than no, I don't want to add Milsap or Ibaka for a max contract. If they are committed to paying whatever it takes, then by all means spend the money you have today and don't worry about tomorrow. Just remember how many of these mega contracts given to 30ish year old players do not work out.

I think that is fair.

If signing Millsap interferes with keeping lavine than it is a bad move and not because Milsap is a bad player but I would be shocked if the wolves are legit title contenders with him in the next couple of years.

Now people will respond well that is dumb glen needs to pay the lux tax but it is a legit concern to take into consideration.

I would rather have wiggins/towns/lavine for 7 years (with the option to trade any of them in their prime) than Milsap/wiggins/towns

I very much agree with this conclusion, and unencumbered by any inside knowledge at all, I sense this is Thibs' take too. I think that is the primary reason he didn't overpay for a high-priced free agent last offseason, and why I think he is unlikely to do otherwise this offseason. Keeping the Big 3 (and putting some serviceable players around them) will already put the Wolves into the lux tax (and the good news is I now believe ownership is willing to pay some lux tax if it means being competitive...just not a ridiculous amount), but signing a high priced player this off season certainly means one of the Big 3 will be "Hardened" in the next couple years. I don't want that. A better plan is this:

1) Be patient and wait to see if the Big 3 can reach their enormous potential, and leave enough dry powder to be able to retain all of them without going too deep into the lux

2) Sign a couple cheap vet free agents who can provide some defense, leadership and toughness

And finally, and this is for Thibs:

3) Actully PLAY those free agents

My prediction is that management will follow the strategy in 1 and 2. Whether 3 happens is up to the coach.

It's kind of a chicken-or-egg thing: What comes first? Winning? Or playing the bench more minutes?

Obviously, the answer with Thibs has been winning (which didn't happen). So, if we start winning, isn't it likely we will see more bench minutes?

The big picture is if we don't show cat and Wiggins we want to win every year when it comes to re-sign them they'll be looking elsewhere

PorkChop wrote:The big picture is if we don't show cat and Wiggins we want to win every year when it comes to re-sign them they'll be looking elsewhere

Sure. In time... right now, Wiggins has been with the team for three seasons and they haven't lost fewer than 51 games with him getting the most minutes.

He's been more of the problem than the solution thus far. As he and KAT improve... that should invariably swing and the wins will follow. And Taylor/Thibodeau will have to flesh out the roster to complement them.

CoolBreeze44 wrote:

monsterpile wrote:https://twitter.com/brittrobson/status/867051420268285953

Fun fact: Total cost to Spurs for Dedmon/Lee/K Anderson/Simmons/Bertans this season--$8.3 million. Patty Mills only $3.2 mil on top of that

See, that's the key - finding contributors that don't break the bank. Unfortunately in the Spurs case a lot of it comes down to culture, and we aren't there yet.

That works for a small window then they lose those guys to new deals and new teams and have to find new ones. How many teams do you believe can do that over and over again? I have no faith most outside of the Spurs and Warriors can do that. Most teams can't replace Cory Joseph with Patty Mills or Splitter with Boban and then with Dedmon. Sure it'd be nice to get there, but 1 team is not the norm nor the formula for our success.