Wolves acquire Gordon

[Crazysauce]

For 17 James Johnson and Spellman per Dane Mosher? Is this real?

https://twitter.com/___daner/status/1328426909340938243?s=19

[kekgeek]

Think you got fooled by a fake account

[Crazysauce]

Yeah disregard

[Camden [enjin:6601484]]

Come on, man.

[SameOldNudityDrew]

I know it's not real, but . . .

Am I crazy for liking Johnson more than Gordon straight up?

[Q12543 [enjin:6621299]]

I know it's not real, but . . .

Am I crazy for liking Johnson more than Gordon straight up?

Yes, a little. You need to peel back the onion on these guys a bit. Gordon is a legit full-time starting player whereas Johnson has almost always been used primarily off the bench. And given Johnson's age, it's highly likely his ability to continue playing at a productive level will require even fewer minutes going forward.

The other thing to look at are some of those second-tier stats like assist to turnover ratio and foul rate. Johnson is worse on both fronts, which suggests to me that he isn't always the greatest decision maker. It's a little ironic since he is supposedly the more savvy vet than Gordon, but I'd argue that Gordon is probably the more intelligent player. We saw some of Johnson's more careless turnovers in the brief stint he played for us last year.

And lastly, Gordon is actually in the same age window as DLO and KAT. He could still conceivably improve.

I'm also a bit "meh" on Gordon, but when people compare him to Johnson, I do believe he is the better player and the better fit of the two.

[AbeVigodaLive]

I know it's not real, but . . .

Am I crazy for liking Johnson more than Gordon straight up?

Yes, a little. You need to peel back the onion on these guys a bit. Gordon is a legit full-time starting player whereas Johnson has almost always been used primarily off the bench. And given Johnson's age, it's highly likely his ability to continue playing at a productive level will require even fewer minutes going forward.

The other thing to look at are some of those second-tier stats like assist to turnover ratio and foul rate. Johnson is worse on both fronts, which suggests to me that he isn't always the greatest decision maker. It's a little ironic since he is supposedly the more savvy vet than Gordon, but I'd argue that Gordon is probably the more intelligent player. We saw some of Johnson's more careless turnovers in the brief stint he played for us last year.

And lastly, Gordon is actually in the same age window as DLO and KAT. He could still conceivably improve.

I'm also a bit "meh" on Gordon, but when people compare him to Johnson, I do believe he is the better player and the better fit of the two.

With his versatility (very good passer), there have been rumblings about Gordon having the potential to be a Draymond Green type.

The rub is that he's basically stagnated. And I've always been a HUGE believer that if a young guy stops improving in years 3 - 5... he's hit his ceiling... or plateau.

[Q12543 [enjin:6621299]]

I know it's not real, but . . .

Am I crazy for liking Johnson more than Gordon straight up?

Yes, a little. You need to peel back the onion on these guys a bit. Gordon is a legit full-time starting player whereas Johnson has almost always been used primarily off the bench. And given Johnson's age, it's highly likely his ability to continue playing at a productive level will require even fewer minutes going forward.

The other thing to look at are some of those second-tier stats like assist to turnover ratio and foul rate. Johnson is worse on both fronts, which suggests to me that he isn't always the greatest decision maker. It's a little ironic since he is supposedly the more savvy vet than Gordon, but I'd argue that Gordon is probably the more intelligent player. We saw some of Johnson's more careless turnovers in the brief stint he played for us last year.

And lastly, Gordon is actually in the same age window as DLO and KAT. He could still conceivably improve.

I'm also a bit "meh" on Gordon, but when people compare him to Johnson, I do believe he is the better player and the better fit of the two.

With is versatility (very good passer), there have been rumblings about Gordon having the potential to be a Draymond Green type.

The rub is that he's basically stagnated. And I've always been a HUGE believer that if a young guy stops improving in years 3 - 5... he's hit his ceiling... or plateau.

Agreed, I certainly don't think he's the next Draymond Green. But I do think the current version of Gordon - even if he doesn't improve - is better than Johnson or Juancho as a starting PF next to KAT. But yeah, that's a lot of coin to pay a decidedly average player.

(of course, Wolves secret weapon Jarred Vanderbilt might make all of this moot!)

[Monster]

I know it's not real, but . . .

Am I crazy for liking Johnson more than Gordon straight up?

Yes, a little. You need to peel back the onion on these guys a bit. Gordon is a legit full-time starting player whereas Johnson has almost always been used primarily off the bench. And given Johnson's age, it's highly likely his ability to continue playing at a productive level will require even fewer minutes going forward.

The other thing to look at are some of those second-tier stats like assist to turnover ratio and foul rate. Johnson is worse on both fronts, which suggests to me that he isn't always the greatest decision maker. It's a little ironic since he is supposedly the more savvy vet than Gordon, but I'd argue that Gordon is probably the more intelligent player. We saw some of Johnson's more careless turnovers in the brief stint he played for us last year.

And lastly, Gordon is actually in the same age window as DLO and KAT. He could still conceivably improve.

I'm also a bit "meh" on Gordon, but when people compare him to Johnson, I do believe he is the better player and the better fit of the two.

With is versatility (very good passer), there have been rumblings about Gordon having the potential to be a Draymond Green type.

The rub is that he's basically stagnated. And I've always been a HUGE believer that if a young guy stops improving in years 3 - 5... he's hit his ceiling... or plateau.

I did some reading about Gordon and one of the articles had takes from people around the league that work for NBA teams. A number of them considered Gordon to be a good defender and another theme that came up was they thought if Gordon went somewhere that he had to do less he would become much more valuable. Basically The idea was if he is more of a 4th best player type then that would suit him better. Every player has risk and reward. He wouldn't be the first player to improve in his mid 20's...I mean a james Johnson took a while to be a good rotation player Gordon is already there and has been for years. He turned 25 a few weeks ago.

[Camden [enjin:6601484]]

I know it's not real, but . . .

Am I crazy for liking Johnson more than Gordon straight up?

Yes, a little. You need to peel back the onion on these guys a bit. Gordon is a legit full-time starting player whereas Johnson has almost always been used primarily off the bench. And given Johnson's age, it's highly likely his ability to continue playing at a productive level will require even fewer minutes going forward.

The other thing to look at are some of those second-tier stats like assist to turnover ratio and foul rate. Johnson is worse on both fronts, which suggests to me that he isn't always the greatest decision maker. It's a little ironic since he is supposedly the more savvy vet than Gordon, but I'd argue that Gordon is probably the more intelligent player. We saw some of Johnson's more careless turnovers in the brief stint he played for us last year.

And lastly, Gordon is actually in the same age window as DLO and KAT. He could still conceivably improve.

I'm also a bit "meh" on Gordon, but when people compare him to Johnson, I do believe he is the better player and the better fit of the two.

I agree with all of what Q said here. Aaron Gordon is better than James Johnson. However, I would be unwilling to part with the 17th overall pick for Gordon. I would rather roll with Johnson and take a swing on a prospect that could potentially be better than Gordon. I know kek and probably others disagree, but that's where I'm at.

Now, if the Wolves were to swap top-three picks with Charlotte and pick up Miles Bridges and the 32nd pick in the process like John Hollinger suggests, and then trade 32, 33, and Johnson for Gordon... I could get behind that perhaps.