Minnesota Sports Forum

https://cleaningtheglass.com/cornered-market/

I agree for what has transpired in the past. However, it used to be that a MAX contract was actually for the best players. Now, a MAX contract means you are maybe the 4-5 best player on your team, but your current contract has expired. This trend will shift that box they highlight as best value....because the vast majority of guys getting max deals these days aren't even close to worth their contracts.

And I love the initial discussion about how if you actually "win" the bidding war, you almost assuredly overpaid. It is soooooo true. Everyone last season fell into the trap of the cap going up. I stated at that time that virtually every guy signed (with exception of a couple legit max guys) was going to be a regretable, and difficult contract to move. Just because the "market" states it is a "good deal" doesn't make it true.

Great article.

Great article, Monster. It makes a compelling case for building primarily through the draft and focusing primarily on elite players for free agent (or I would add) trade acquisitions. It also underscores my problem with the Taj signing, which reflect Thibs overvaluing him.

The article provides a strong analytical basis for what many of us have already noted. That is, the really good organizations (one of them the Thunder) rarely fall prey to overvaluing free agents. Instead, they build primarily through the draft and to some extent by using free agency or trades to acquire an elite player like LeBron James, Paul George or, yes, Jimmy Butler. So kudos to Thibs for getting Butler. But I think we'll ultimately see that Thibs fell prey to the overvaluing phenomenon discussed in the article when he signed Teague and Taj at the amounts agreed to. In contrast, the Thunder ended up with what appears to be a relative bargain at less than half the price of Taj. I think the Clippers ended up with a bargain in Teo at only around $12 million over two years.

I guess, in the end, it boils down to judgment. Sam Presti typically shows good savvy judgment. He drafted Westbrook at #4 when no one thought he should go anywhere close to that high. He draft Harden higher than most thought he was worth. One of Sam's few mistakes was trading Harden to avoid a future luxury tax problem. Now we see Presti landing Paul George while giving up surprisingly little. Part of that was getting Oladipo in exchange for Ibaka, giving him a young player with meaningful trade value.

I'm hoping that Thibs and Layden show judgment on par with Presti, the Spurs organization and a few others. So far, it's a mixed bag in my view. This upcoming season will tell us a lot about the judgment of Thibs and Layden. I hope that hindsight a year from now shows them to be geniuses. :)

Hicks123 wrote:I agree for what has transpired in the past. However, it used to be that a MAX contract was actually for the best players. Now, a MAX contract means you are maybe the 4-5 best player on your team, but your current contract has expired. This trend will shift that box they highlight as best value....because the vast majority of guys getting max deals these days aren't even close to worth their contracts.

And I love the initial discussion about how if you actually "win" the bidding war, you almost assuredly overpaid. It is soooooo true. Everyone last season fell into the trap of the cap going up. I stated at that time that virtually every guy signed (with exception of a couple legit max guys) was going to be a regretable, and difficult contract to move. Just because the "market" states it is a "good deal" doesn't make it true.

Great article.

You make good points. I think we have seen a few teams shy away from that max contracts for those good but non top players situation and even that higher max for really good players. KCP didn't get the max. A few players were dealt likely impart because the team trading them weren't willing to use their higher max salary and length to bring that guy back. Lowry got paid but it could have been more same for Millsap and Both of those teams won the bidding war.

This article shows just how valuable finding cheap young players are. Those late 1st round picks stay cheap for 4 years and make them more and more valuable. Patton will be a couple million cheaper than Markken in a couple years and a guy we pick in the 20's next year will be even cheaper. Unless you really whiff on those picks it's a great way to get a nice player cheaply.

I assume you know this, Lip, but there are those of us who think Taj is a really good signing, even at 14 mil per year.

Last year we had a top 10 offense, but were near the bottom on defense. Deing and KAT do not form a foundation for a solid defensive front court. Taj fills a need that many of us feel is a bigger hole than 3-point shooting OR bench depth.

You have been really pushing the "Taj signing is a terrible mistake" bit. Just wanted you to know there others who think it is one of Thibs better decisions.

monsterpile wrote:

Hicks123 wrote:I agree for what has transpired in the past. However, it used to be that a MAX contract was actually for the best players. Now, a MAX contract means you are maybe the 4-5 best player on your team, but your current contract has expired. This trend will shift that box they highlight as best value....because the vast majority of guys getting max deals these days aren't even close to worth their contracts.

And I love the initial discussion about how if you actually "win" the bidding war, you almost assuredly overpaid. It is soooooo true. Everyone last season fell into the trap of the cap going up. I stated at that time that virtually every guy signed (with exception of a couple legit max guys) was going to be a regretable, and difficult contract to move. Just because the "market" states it is a "good deal" doesn't make it true.

Great article.

You make good points. I think we have seen a few teams shy away from that max contracts for those good but non top players situation and even that higher max for really good players. KCP didn't get the max. A few players were dealt likely impart because the team trading them weren't willing to use their higher max salary and length to bring that guy back. Lowry got paid but it could have been more same for Millsap and Both of those teams won the bidding war.

This article shows just how valuable finding cheap young players are. Those late 1st round picks stay cheap for 4 years and make them more and more valuable. Patton will be a couple million cheaper than Markken in a couple years and a guy we pick in the 20's next year will be even cheaper. Unless you really whiff on those picks it's a great way to get a nice player cheaply.

Good point, Monster, about the value of late 1st round picks. To me that's the main value to the Wolves in the Rubio/Teague swap that gives me some solace. Yes, we lost $5 million in cap space this summer. But based on the article, a 1st round pick in the 20s is probably a better value than a $5 million free agent. But I'd still rather have a draft pick in the teens. So perhaps Westbrook and/or Paul George will get nicked up a bit and miss enough games to drop them into the 15-20 range. Note, I don't want anyone to get seriously hurt. But wanting those guys to miss some key games because of a temporary nagging injury or two seems sufficiently humane and reasonable to me. :)

lipoli390 wrote:Great article, Monster. It makes a compelling case for building primarily through the draft and focusing primarily on elite players for free agent (or I would add) trade acquisitions. It also underscores my problem with the Taj signing, which reflect Thibs overvaluing him.

The article provides a strong analytical basis for what many of us have already noted. That is, the really good organizations (one of them the Thunder) rarely fall prey to overvaluing free agents. Instead, they build primarily through the draft and to some extent by using free agency or trades to acquire an elite player like LeBron James, Paul George or, yes, Jimmy Butler. So kudos to Thibs for getting Butler. But I think we'll ultimately see that Thibs fell prey to the overvaluing phenomenon discussed in the article when he signed Teague and Taj at the amounts agreed to. In contrast, the Thunder ended up with what appears to be a relative bargain at less than half the price of Taj. I think the Clippers ended up with a bargain in Teo at only around $12 million over two years.

I guess, in the end, it boils down to judgment. Sam Presti typically shows good savvy judgment. He drafted Westbrook at #4 when no one thought he should go anywhere close to that high. He draft Harden higher than most thought he was worth. One of Sam's few mistakes was trading Harden to avoid a future luxury tax problem. Now we see Presti landing Paul George while giving up surprisingly little. Part of that was getting Oladipo in exchange for Ibaka, giving him a young player with meaningful trade value.

I'm hoping that Thibs and Layden show judgment on par with Presti, the Spurs organization and a few others. So far, it's a mixed bag in my view. This upcoming season will tell us a lot about the judgment of Thibs and Layden. I hope that hindsight a year from now shows them to be geniuses. :)

Presti has made some good moves but he hasn't nailed everything either. He basically overvalued Kanter (what was that other principal?) and ultimately paid him too much. Of course I think we can now say he valued Jackson correctly by moving him. I'm not trying to throw rocks at him because It's difficult to not say he is one of the top guys doing what he has done but yeah. It's pretty amazing though that he basically turned Ibaka into Paul George and saved money doing it. Lol

Even if Thibs/Layden has been a mixed bag (that's probably fair although "mixed bag" usually sounds bad) that's a positive because there have been so many points these last 2 offseason they could have made very poor decisions that would have really hampered the Wolves even more than paying Dieng, Aldrich and Gibson. I have to admit I would have screwed up bigtime on salalries and I am usually a guy that isn't interested in paying up. lol

In a QA with ESPN Thibs said Taj is the best switching big in the league. If that's remotely true (not saying it is) $14 million per would be totally worth it because that's really valuable even in this lower market and he has been effective for years this isn't 1 year wonder type of guy. anyway I thought that was interesting.

lipoli390 wrote:

monsterpile wrote:

Hicks123 wrote:I agree for what has transpired in the past. However, it used to be that a MAX contract was actually for the best players. Now, a MAX contract means you are maybe the 4-5 best player on your team, but your current contract has expired. This trend will shift that box they highlight as best value....because the vast majority of guys getting max deals these days aren't even close to worth their contracts.

And I love the initial discussion about how if you actually "win" the bidding war, you almost assuredly overpaid. It is soooooo true. Everyone last season fell into the trap of the cap going up. I stated at that time that virtually every guy signed (with exception of a couple legit max guys) was going to be a regretable, and difficult contract to move. Just because the "market" states it is a "good deal" doesn't make it true.

Great article.

You make good points. I think we have seen a few teams shy away from that max contracts for those good but non top players situation and even that higher max for really good players. KCP didn't get the max. A few players were dealt likely impart because the team trading them weren't willing to use their higher max salary and length to bring that guy back. Lowry got paid but it could have been more same for Millsap and Both of those teams won the bidding war.

This article shows just how valuable finding cheap young players are. Those late 1st round picks stay cheap for 4 years and make them more and more valuable. Patton will be a couple million cheaper than Markken in a couple years and a guy we pick in the 20's next year will be even cheaper. Unless you really whiff on those picks it's a great way to get a nice player cheaply.

Good point, Monster, about the value of late 1st round picks. To me that's the main value to the Wolves in the Rubio/Teague swap that gives me some solace. Yes, we lost $5 million in cap space this summer. But based on the article, a 1st round pick in the 20s is probably a better value than a $5 million free agent. But I'd still rather have a draft pick in the teens. So perhaps Westbrook and/or Paul George will get nicked up a bit and miss enough games to drop them into the 15-20 range. Note, I don't want anyone to get seriously hurt. But wanting those guys to miss some key games because of a temporary nagging injury or two seems sufficiently humane and reasonable to me. :)

It's funny the first thing that gave me solace about the Butler trade was when I saw we got the #16 back. That's funny how that could drive me off the ledge but I do value draft picks quite highly although i think I am fairly rational about what the outcome can be (many don't work out).

monsterpile wrote:

lipoli390 wrote:

monsterpile wrote:

Hicks123 wrote:I agree for what has transpired in the past. However, it used to be that a MAX contract was actually for the best players. Now, a MAX contract means you are maybe the 4-5 best player on your team, but your current contract has expired. This trend will shift that box they highlight as best value....because the vast majority of guys getting max deals these days aren't even close to worth their contracts.

And I love the initial discussion about how if you actually "win" the bidding war, you almost assuredly overpaid. It is soooooo true. Everyone last season fell into the trap of the cap going up. I stated at that time that virtually every guy signed (with exception of a couple legit max guys) was going to be a regretable, and difficult contract to move. Just because the "market" states it is a "good deal" doesn't make it true.

Great article.

You make good points. I think we have seen a few teams shy away from that max contracts for those good but non top players situation and even that higher max for really good players. KCP didn't get the max. A few players were dealt likely impart because the team trading them weren't willing to use their higher max salary and length to bring that guy back. Lowry got paid but it could have been more same for Millsap and Both of those teams won the bidding war.

This article shows just how valuable finding cheap young players are. Those late 1st round picks stay cheap for 4 years and make them more and more valuable. Patton will be a couple million cheaper than Markken in a couple years and a guy we pick in the 20's next year will be even cheaper. Unless you really whiff on those picks it's a great way to get a nice player cheaply.

Good point, Monster, about the value of late 1st round picks. To me that's the main value to the Wolves in the Rubio/Teague swap that gives me some solace. Yes, we lost $5 million in cap space this summer. But based on the article, a 1st round pick in the 20s is probably a better value than a $5 million free agent. But I'd still rather have a draft pick in the teens. So perhaps Westbrook and/or Paul George will get nicked up a bit and miss enough games to drop them into the 15-20 range. Note, I don't want anyone to get seriously hurt. But wanting those guys to miss some key games because of a temporary nagging injury or two seems sufficiently humane and reasonable to me. :)

It's funny the first thing that gave me solace about the Butler trade was when I saw we got the #16 back. That's funny how that could drive me off the ledge but I do value draft picks quite highly although i think I am fairly rational about what the outcome can be (many don't work out).

I had the exact same reaction to the Butler deal. When I heard them start announcing the deal on ESPN my heart started to actually sink a little until moments later when they announced that we also got the 16th pick.

We both know that the success rate of 1st round picks isn't stellar. But we also know that the value of 1st round picks is much greater than the success rate of those picks as NBA players. There are at least two reasons for the enhanced value of picks: First, the CBA-established rookie contracts are extraordinarily team-friendly both as to the amount and the team's long-term control over the player. Second, picks have disproportionate trade value relative to the likelihood of the pick panning out. That's why its always silly to trade a future 1st round pick for a guy like Payne. The currency of a 1st round pick should be limited to use in a package to get a proven elite or borderline elite player. When you're trading a 1st round pick, you're also trading hope and excitement and that's what enhances the value of the pick beyond the likely long-term performance of the prospect.

http://bleacherreport.com/articles/2697944-darko-milicic-says-hed-approach-nba-career-differently-after-becoming-farmer

Darko flat out told Kahn not to sign him but he did anyway and had the nerve to tell Chris Webber it was mana from heaven