Minnesota Sports Forum

i am surprised we haven't heard anything about a wiggins extension yet. Does anyone have any info on this?

sjm34 wrote:i am surprised we haven't heard anything about a wiggins extension yet. Does anyone have any info on this?

We have until December no reason to do it now. What if he gets seriously hurt

kekgeek1 wrote:

sjm34 wrote:i am surprised we haven't heard anything about a wiggins extension yet. Does anyone have any info on this?

We have until December no reason to do it now. What if he gets seriously hurt

I feel like the operating assumption seems to be that he deserves the max. That may be the league consensus too, although I really want him to do more than score if he's going to take up a max contract for us. I'd sign him for the max, but keep open the option to trade him at some point later if the right deal comes along unless he can develop a more well-rounded game.

He's gonna get the 5 year max, which rewards him for his marginal development, so just resign yourself to this deal.

It was suggested on a realgm podcast that they should do the extension this year. Danny isn't as high on Wiggins as some other people. Both agreed that what was the real upside of locking him up now? Goodwill? Has he really earned that max deal? Why not wait worst case scenario someone offers him the max you match it and move on. I wouldn't be shocked if they waited and let things play out. My guess is they will do the extension but we will see. Regardless I don't really think it's something ai am going to think about all that much because one way or another he is gonna get paid plenty of money.

While it's certainly a risk to give him a 5 year max, the opposite end is if you let him hit free agency his deal will likely be a 3+1 by whoever signs him to ensure he hits the market sooner and you end up in the Hayward situation. Basically it comes down to if you know he's getting the max from someone else, why not lock him into 5 guaranteed years at a max than have him hit unrestricted free agency after 3? Worst case scenario is you end up with a number 2 option getting overpaid a little bit and the best case scenario is you locked up a max player for 5 whole guaranteed years which is a really long time to keep someone in this league. As a small market we really should just lock up Wiggins and Towns for the next 5 years and give ourselves more time to tailor the team around them than give them the opportunity to leave early.

Agree. We got out of the LaVine contemplation. Now, We need to lock up Wigg and KAT ASAP so we ensure two windows of competitiveness.

khans2k5 wrote:While it's certainly a risk to give him a 5 year max, the opposite end is if you let him hit free agency his deal will likely be a 3+1 by whoever signs him to ensure he hits the market sooner and you end up in the Hayward situation. Basically it comes down to if you know he's getting the max from someone else, why not lock him into 5 guaranteed years at a max than have him hit unrestricted free agency after 3? Worst case scenario is you end up with a number 2 option getting overpaid a little bit and the best case scenario is you locked up a max player for 5 whole guaranteed years which is a really long time to keep someone in this league. As a small market we really should just lock up Wiggins and Towns for the next 5 years and give ourselves more time to tailor the team around them than give them the opportunity to leave early.

Completely agree, don't fuck around with this and just give Wiggins and Towns (obviously) the 5 year max and go from there

BloopOracle wrote:

khans2k5 wrote:While it's certainly a risk to give him a 5 year max, the opposite end is if you let him hit free agency his deal will likely be a 3+1 by whoever signs him to ensure he hits the market sooner and you end up in the Hayward situation. Basically it comes down to if you know he's getting the max from someone else, why not lock him into 5 guaranteed years at a max than have him hit unrestricted free agency after 3? Worst case scenario is you end up with a number 2 option getting overpaid a little bit and the best case scenario is you locked up a max player for 5 whole guaranteed years which is a really long time to keep someone in this league. As a small market we really should just lock up Wiggins and Towns for the next 5 years and give ourselves more time to tailor the team around them than give them the opportunity to leave early.

Completely agree, don't fuck around with this and just give Wiggins and Towns (obviously) the 5 year max and go from there

Absolutely right!!!

lipoli390 wrote:

BloopOracle wrote:

khans2k5 wrote:While it's certainly a risk to give him a 5 year max, the opposite end is if you let him hit free agency his deal will likely be a 3+1 by whoever signs him to ensure he hits the market sooner and you end up in the Hayward situation. Basically it comes down to if you know he's getting the max from someone else, why not lock him into 5 guaranteed years at a max than have him hit unrestricted free agency after 3? Worst case scenario is you end up with a number 2 option getting overpaid a little bit and the best case scenario is you locked up a max player for 5 whole guaranteed years which is a really long time to keep someone in this league. As a small market we really should just lock up Wiggins and Towns for the next 5 years and give ourselves more time to tailor the team around them than give them the opportunity to leave early.

Completely agree, don't fuck around with this and just give Wiggins and Towns (obviously) the 5 year max and go from there

Absolutely right!!!

Good point yeah they should do it.