Minnesota Sports Forum

At some point, the smaller markets, the medium markets, the non-"destination" markets, they're gonna have to collectively wise the hell up and realize that trading superstars for parts is NOT a better option than letting superstars walk for nothing. Not with the way the salary cap is set up in this league.

Love wants to go to a contender. Contenders are, almost without exception, at or over the cap. They can't sign him outright unless he's willing to take an enormous (~70%) paycut and play for the MLE. His only route to these teams, for the most part, is through sign and trade. This would also appear to be in our best interest as well; after all, you want compensation for the loss of a superstar player. You want pieces for the inevitable rebuild, right?

But what pieces can you really get? You can't get fair value without stripping your trade partner, and stripping your trade partner will submarine them right out of contender status - the very thing that is attracting Love to said trade partner in the first place. Besides, most of the teams with actual legit lottery picks and young players aren't contenders anyways. You'd love to trade him to Phoenix, but they're not going to bite unless he resigns. And he's not going to resign in Phoenix.

So it seems like he's got us over a barrel, huh? Like we should eventually take practically whatever we can get from whichever contender offers up the least offensive (but still not particularly potent) offer. This usually means a mediocre lottery pick well outside of the "franchise player" range, one or two decent young players who will absolutely flee our team when their contracts end, and some horrendous salary-matching deal that will expire in a year or two. Gee, why do these contenders, with such smart GMs, always have one or two "horrible deals" on hand for salary-matching purposes...

I'll tell you why. Because the whole "trade us your superstar for this nonsense because it's better than losing him for nothing" deal is a gigantic fucking racket. The ONLY way these guys get to the big markets and the super teams is if all the other smaller markets and teams willingly participate in what is basically self-sabotage. We continually funnel our superstar players to the "teams that matter" at their behest in exchange for what exactly? An outside chance at getting another superstar who will force the exact same play in 3-4 years?

The smart thing to do in this situation: let Kevin Love walk for absolutely nothing. If he can sign outright with a legitimate super team, oh well. There are only so many of those situations in the NBA. For the most part, contenders are capped out and unable to outright sign max players to fair market deals. Sure, Love might land some place cushy. But what about the next superstar, the one right behind him? What if there isn't any place for him to go as an unrestricted free agent? You think he's taking a $10m a year paycut? Or is he going to look around, assess the "next tier" of teams, and maybe go some place less marquee in exchange for his proper market compensation?

Getting picks and a player or two in exchange for Love might help us short term, but it won't solve the overriding problem with the NBA: small/medium markets continually sending superstar players to the bigger teams. Don't forget that every superteam you create is one you also have to contend with. If three small markets separately ship superstars to loaded teams and create three new superteams, those smaller markets might be inadvertently generating 10-12 more losses for themselves per season for 2-3 years out.

I'm rambling, but I hope I've effectively conveyed my point here. We shouldn't be complicit in this ongoing scam. We should be banding together with other small and medium markets to send these superstar players a message: if you want to join the next superteam, you better be prepared to take a massive pay cut.

The Heat got the big 3 because they got the last cap space needed by shipping Beasley out to us for picks. The fact is big markets find other small markets that take the pieces they need to get off their books to open the space needed to sign superstar players and then they sign the superstar anyway. The smart teams understand the concept of, "If you build it, they will come." They know they just need to get the stars and the veterans will take the pay cuts to go after a title. Orlando won the Dwight trade. The NY/Denver trade appears to be pretty even in terms of team success. The big markets will always have the advantage that signing one star will likely lead to the signing of a second star and all of a sudden they become a good team with 2 stars. Love is going to be more willing to deal with this level of losing in a big market than a small one and at least in a big market he won't have to wait as long to get a second star to help him out. We don't have the youth that makes a full rebuild make sense at this point. We have too many veterans that we would have to ship out that wouldn't return very valuable youth anyway. If he says that he is testing the market, it would be flat out stupid to try to get nothing in return for him just to make a statement. The league is going to forget about that statement pretty quick when he is playing in LA and we are looking like we're on our way to Seattle.

He may have to take a pay cut to become part of a "super team' but he'll make that back in endorsements. Team accomplishments breeds financial opportunities for its best players. Great players arent completely reliant on their salary. If Love leaves for a big market while taking a paycut. His agent has already assured him he'll make his money thru other ventures. And if he continues to play this well theres no doubt he will.
After last year his best endorsement was a fastfood commercial, imagine if he replicates that year somewhere like New York. His earning potential is so much greater. Unfortunately it goes past the game of basketball.

Yeah, we should just let the best player on the team leave without getting anything in return. That makes perfect basketball/business/common sense... :dizzy:

Fuck a statement. Do all that is possible to make this team better. Letting Love walk for nothing while knowing he wants out is the dumbest thing imaginable.

I hope thats not in resonse to me. I would like to keep him but when reality hits u in the face u make as much chicken salad out of the chicken shit uve been given. Thats the reality of Minnesota sports.

Good idea in theory bad idea in reality. Teams don't work together on a large scale basis, the moment a team sees an opportunity to improve they take it. A small market team under the cap will take picks and a bad contract to open up salary space for another team. Your idea doesn't work if even 1 larger market team has cap space, a team will never improve if its best players leave for nothing.

The Rage Monster wrote:Good idea in theory bad idea in reality. Teams don't work together on a large scale basis, the moment a team sees an opportunity to improve they take it. A small market team under the cap will take picks and a bad contract to open up salary space for another team. Your idea doesn't work if even 1 larger market team has cap space, a team will never improve if its best players leave for nothing.

Well hold on, I never said he'd leave for nothing but if it comes down to the Wolves offering a couple Mill more would that be enough?

While I don't necessarily think a team should NEVER trade a star, I generally agree with your premise. I would be perfectly fine if Minnesota held their ground during negotiations this offseason and determined that no one offered enough for Love. They should absolutely not feel forced to compromise.

I am in complete agreement on not trading him unless we get a great offer. There is no reason to take back 50 cents on the dollar and be sitting with a non PO team winning 30 games. You can't get better that way.

The Rage Monster wrote:Good idea in theory bad idea in reality. Teams don't work together on a large scale basis, the moment a team sees an opportunity to improve they take it. A small market team under the cap will take picks and a bad contract to open up salary space for another team. Your idea doesn't work if even 1 larger market team has cap space, a team will never improve if its best players leave for nothing.

This short sightedness is precisely why we have a league of haves and have nots. The big markets leverage our desire for short-term gains into bad long-term policy. Meanwhile, we (the non-destination markets) continually create superteams we will never beat while securing "picks" that only ever turn into more disgruntled superstars... who then force their way onto the handful of teams that matter.

Remember, the ONLY route these players have to capped-out superteams is sign and trade. Take that route away, their options become limited to teams with actual cap space to sign them.