Minnesota Sports Forum

khans2k5 wrote:

monsterpile wrote:So...are we supposed to pay Barnes 18 million or more and then in a couple years be paying Towns Wiggins and our other stud we draft this year (or some other player) all a ton of money? Good teams find value players. If Barnes doesn't get max money he is going to get a lot from someone. Book it. I am all for quality over quantity, but you still have to be smart on how you spend. Its all a gamble just in different ways.

Here's the thing. We're talking a 1 year overlap with Towns and 2 with Wiggins if we sign Barnes to the max 4 year deal (not max dollars) we can offer him. It's not like a big deal to Barnes also stays with Wiggins and Towns' deal long-term. That's when you add the value guys around Towns and Wiggins. Why are we saving money for guys when the money will be there almost regardless unless we add multiple big money guys which we can't really do anyway due to Ricky and Pek's deals? Pek's deal expiring covers most of Wiggins' raise when it starts and Ricky's expiring could cover most of KAT's if needed. If you wait to offer someone the max then you really tie up cap space with that deal overlapping multiple years with Wiggins and Towns and our draft pick this year. What if we did a 3 year max deal for Barnes and it overlaps with only 1 Wiggins year and no Towns years? I think too many people are worried about what the payroll will look like in 3-4 years and beyond when that's exactly when his deal will expire and not matter on those other deals anyway. Meanwhile we get better right away for the next 3-4 years and don't fully bank on the Towns/Wiggins bandwagon carrying the team by themselves with value role players around them for the next couple years.

monsterpile wrote:

khans2k5 wrote:

monsterpile wrote:So...are we supposed to pay Barnes 18 million or more and then in a couple years be paying Towns Wiggins and our other stud we draft this year (or some other player) all a ton of money? Good teams find value players. If Barnes doesn't get max money he is going to get a lot from someone. Book it. I am all for quality over quantity, but you still have to be smart on how you spend. Its all a gamble just in different ways.

Here's the thing. We're talking a 1 year overlap with Towns and 2 with Wiggins if we sign Barnes to the max 4 year deal (not max dollars) we can offer him. It's not like a big deal to Barnes also stays with Wiggins and Towns' deal long-term. That's when you add the value guys around Towns and Wiggins. Why are we saving money for guys when the money will be there almost regardless unless we add multiple big money guys which we can't really do anyway due to Ricky and Pek's deals? Pek's deal expiring covers most of Wiggins' raise when it starts and Ricky's expiring could cover most of KAT's if needed. If you wait to offer someone the max then you really tie up cap space with that deal overlapping multiple years with Wiggins and Towns and our draft pick this year. What if we did a 3 year max deal for Barnes and it overlaps with only 1 Wiggins year and no Towns years? I think too many people are worried about what the payroll will look like in 3-4 years and beyond when that's exactly when his deal will expire and not matter on those other deals anyway. Meanwhile we get better right away for the next 3-4 years and don't fully bank on the Towns/Wiggins bandwagon carrying the team by themselves with value role players around them for the next couple years.

So Barnes is a bridge guy?

khans2k5 wrote:

monsterpile wrote:

khans2k5 wrote:

monsterpile wrote:So...are we supposed to pay Barnes 18 million or more and then in a couple years be paying Towns Wiggins and our other stud we draft this year (or some other player) all a ton of money? Good teams find value players. If Barnes doesn't get max money he is going to get a lot from someone. Book it. I am all for quality over quantity, but you still have to be smart on how you spend. Its all a gamble just in different ways.

Here's the thing. We're talking a 1 year overlap with Towns and 2 with Wiggins if we sign Barnes to the max 4 year deal (not max dollars) we can offer him. It's not like a big deal to Barnes also stays with Wiggins and Towns' deal long-term. That's when you add the value guys around Towns and Wiggins. Why are we saving money for guys when the money will be there almost regardless unless we add multiple big money guys which we can't really do anyway due to Ricky and Pek's deals? Pek's deal expiring covers most of Wiggins' raise when it starts and Ricky's expiring could cover most of KAT's if needed. If you wait to offer someone the max then you really tie up cap space with that deal overlapping multiple years with Wiggins and Towns and our draft pick this year. What if we did a 3 year max deal for Barnes and it overlaps with only 1 Wiggins year and no Towns years? I think too many people are worried about what the payroll will look like in 3-4 years and beyond when that's exactly when his deal will expire and not matter on those other deals anyway. Meanwhile we get better right away for the next 3-4 years and don't fully bank on the Towns/Wiggins bandwagon carrying the team by themselves with value role players around them for the next couple years.

So Barnes is a bridge guy?

I think it'd be a good problem to have if he was good enough for us to have to re-think our cap situation in 3-4 years to keep him. At worst he's a bridge guy back to respectability. I'd rather have the argument of how we're gonna pay all our max worthy players than not go for it at all because we're saving money for guys 3-4 years down the line.

monsterpile wrote:

khans2k5 wrote:

monsterpile wrote:

khans2k5 wrote:

monsterpile wrote:So...are we supposed to pay Barnes 18 million or more and then in a couple years be paying Towns Wiggins and our other stud we draft this year (or some other player) all a ton of money? Good teams find value players. If Barnes doesn't get max money he is going to get a lot from someone. Book it. I am all for quality over quantity, but you still have to be smart on how you spend. Its all a gamble just in different ways.

Here's the thing. We're talking a 1 year overlap with Towns and 2 with Wiggins if we sign Barnes to the max 4 year deal (not max dollars) we can offer him. It's not like a big deal to Barnes also stays with Wiggins and Towns' deal long-term. That's when you add the value guys around Towns and Wiggins. Why are we saving money for guys when the money will be there almost regardless unless we add multiple big money guys which we can't really do anyway due to Ricky and Pek's deals? Pek's deal expiring covers most of Wiggins' raise when it starts and Ricky's expiring could cover most of KAT's if needed. If you wait to offer someone the max then you really tie up cap space with that deal overlapping multiple years with Wiggins and Towns and our draft pick this year. What if we did a 3 year max deal for Barnes and it overlaps with only 1 Wiggins year and no Towns years? I think too many people are worried about what the payroll will look like in 3-4 years and beyond when that's exactly when his deal will expire and not matter on those other deals anyway. Meanwhile we get better right away for the next 3-4 years and don't fully bank on the Towns/Wiggins bandwagon carrying the team by themselves with value role players around them for the next couple years.

So Barnes is a bridge guy?

I think it'd be a good problem to have if he was good enough for us to have to re-think our cap situation in 3-4 years to keep him. At worst he's a bridge guy back to respectability. I'd rather have the argument of how we're gonna pay all our max worthy players than not go for it at all because we're saving money for guys 3-4 years down the line.

Fair enough I guess I am sorta with Cam I don't know if he ends up being worth that much money. You do but either stance is perfectly reasonable to me.

Ultimately it's still early on the FA front but it's interesting to talk about it now. I think part of me thinks this team can (or at least should) find a defensive wing without having to pony up 10 million+ per to get one. I know I am having a lot of faith in an organization that may have nobody in place to have faith in but I am just expecting what good organizations are able to do.

khans2k5 wrote:

monsterpile wrote:

khans2k5 wrote:

monsterpile wrote:

khans2k5 wrote:

monsterpile wrote:So...are we supposed to pay Barnes 18 million or more and then in a couple years be paying Towns Wiggins and our other stud we draft this year (or some other player) all a ton of money? Good teams find value players. If Barnes doesn't get max money he is going to get a lot from someone. Book it. I am all for quality over quantity, but you still have to be smart on how you spend. Its all a gamble just in different ways.

Here's the thing. We're talking a 1 year overlap with Towns and 2 with Wiggins if we sign Barnes to the max 4 year deal (not max dollars) we can offer him. It's not like a big deal to Barnes also stays with Wiggins and Towns' deal long-term. That's when you add the value guys around Towns and Wiggins. Why are we saving money for guys when the money will be there almost regardless unless we add multiple big money guys which we can't really do anyway due to Ricky and Pek's deals? Pek's deal expiring covers most of Wiggins' raise when it starts and Ricky's expiring could cover most of KAT's if needed. If you wait to offer someone the max then you really tie up cap space with that deal overlapping multiple years with Wiggins and Towns and our draft pick this year. What if we did a 3 year max deal for Barnes and it overlaps with only 1 Wiggins year and no Towns years? I think too many people are worried about what the payroll will look like in 3-4 years and beyond when that's exactly when his deal will expire and not matter on those other deals anyway. Meanwhile we get better right away for the next 3-4 years and don't fully bank on the Towns/Wiggins bandwagon carrying the team by themselves with value role players around them for the next couple years.

So Barnes is a bridge guy?

I think it'd be a good problem to have if he was good enough for us to have to re-think our cap situation in 3-4 years to keep him. At worst he's a bridge guy back to respectability. I'd rather have the argument of how we're gonna pay all our max worthy players than not go for it at all because we're saving money for guys 3-4 years down the line.

Fair enough I guess I am sorta with Cam I don't know if he ends up being worth that much money. You do but either stance is perfectly reasonable to me.

Ultimately it's still early on the FA front but it's interesting to talk about it now. I think part of me thinks this team can (or at least should) find a defensive wing without having to pony up 10 million+ per to get one. I know I am having a lot of faith in an organization that may have nobody in place to have faith in but I am just expecting what good organizations are able to do.

I'll just say this. Everyone you thought were within 3-4 million of that 10 million, 8 figure deal is now gonna get that 10+ million under the new cap. The crazy deals we saw last summer are just the starting point and we saw guys like Kanter and Reggie Jackson get max contracts. Those deals just won't be max deals anymore, but the money will look similar.