HeHateMe wrote: ↑Thu Jun 27, 2019 6:02 pm
Dane Moore lays out the deal:
Teague + KBD + Cam Reynolds in a sign and trade for a maxed Russell. Teague would go to a third team likely with a future first round, maybe top 5-6 protected for 2020. And then you'd compensate the Nets with maybe a second in addition to KBD and Reynolds. You can substitute Okogie for that but I'm guessing Minnesota doesn't want to do that.
Thanks for posting.
I am all for this if it costs us only ONE first.
I wouldn't give up a first easily, multiple seconds is good value in a S&T. And frankly I think you could move Teauge really easy for two 2nds (in a vaccum, anyways), but that is 4 2nds, do we even have them...?
And the real problem lies with the leverage of the third team. Being able to close the third team without giving away the farm is critical. But I could see it costing a first or Okogie.
It won't happen, not worried. I could see one 1st or Okogie not two 1sts and some 2nds. That is the modern historical value, if we were to pay more than that, knowing that, then Rosas isn't likely any good. It is a good test to see where he is at. So what will I do? Drink...alot! But I would do that anyways.
Last edited by SO_MONEY on Thu Jun 27, 2019 7:04 pm, edited 2 times in total.
HeHateMe wrote: ↑Thu Jun 27, 2019 6:02 pm
Dane Moore lays out the deal:
Teague + KBD + Cam Reynolds in a sign and trade for a maxed Russell. Teague would go to a third team likely with a future first round, maybe top 5-6 protected for 2020. And then you'd compensate the Nets with maybe a second in addition to KBD and Reynolds. You can substitute Okogie for that but I'm guessing Minnesota doesn't want to do that.
Thanks for posting.
I am all for this if it costs us only ONE first.
I wouldn't give up a first easily, multiple seconds is good value in a S&T. And frankly I think you could move Teauge really easy for two 2nds (in a vaccum, anyways), but that is 4 2nds, do we even have them...?
And the real problem lies with the leverage of the third team. Being able to close the third team without giving away the farm is critical. But I could see it costing a first or Okogie.
Aren't second considered more valuable than late first rounders? If the first round pick is protected, I don't have much of an issue. But you're right with how valuable picks are these days. I am also assuming that we have to really give up something to get Dlo, as Reynolds, Teague and KBD doesn't sound like fair value. On the other hand, Nets want Kyrie, they are going to lose Russell anyway, getting a little package like this isn't too shabby.
I wouldn't give up a first easily, multiple seconds is good value in a S&T. And frankly I think you could move Teauge really easy for two 2nds (in a vaccum, anyways), but that is 4 2nds, do we even have them...?
And the real problem lies with the leverage of the third team. Being able to close the third team without giving away the farm is critical. But I could see it costing a first or Okogie.
Aren't second considered more valuable than late first rounders? If the first round pick is protected, I don't have much of an issue. But you're right with how valuable picks are these days. I am also assuming that we have to really give up something to get Dlo, as Reynolds, Teague and KBD doesn't sound like fair value. On the other hand, Nets want Kyrie, they are going to lose Russell anyway, getting a little package like this isn't too shabby.
Not sure what the package is? A 2nd round pick? That is what the Nets get. The team taking the salary gets a first round pick.
I wouldn't give up a first easily, multiple seconds is good value in a S&T. And frankly I think you could move Teauge really easy for two 2nds (in a vaccum, anyways), but that is 4 2nds, do we even have them...?
And the real problem lies with the leverage of the third team. Being able to close the third team without giving away the farm is critical. But I could see it costing a first or Okogie.
Aren't second considered more valuable than late first rounders? If the first round pick is protected, I don't have much of an issue. But you're right with how valuable picks are these days. I am also assuming that we have to really give up something to get Dlo, as Reynolds, Teague and KBD doesn't sound like fair value. On the other hand, Nets want Kyrie, they are going to lose Russell anyway, getting a little package like this isn't too shabby.
Not sure what the package is? A 2nd round pick? That is what the Nets get. The team taking the salary gets a first round pick.
Aren't second considered more valuable than late first rounders? If the first round pick is protected, I don't have much of an issue. But you're right with how valuable picks are these days. I am also assuming that we have to really give up something to get Dlo, as Reynolds, Teague and KBD doesn't sound like fair value. On the other hand, Nets want Kyrie, they are going to lose Russell anyway, getting a little package like this isn't too shabby.
Not sure what the package is? A 2nd round pick? That is what the Nets get. The team taking the salary gets a first round pick.
You're talking about the third team?
I think the concept is the Nets would get a 2nd for executing the S&T, another team a first for absorbing the salaries.
NotRasho wrote: ↑Fri Jun 28, 2019 8:45 am
Say no to Russell. He will cost way more than hes worth. Hes an inefficient volume scorer who got 19 shots a game to score 21 points on a mediocre eastern conference team. He doesnt even deserve to get Lavine money imo.
NotRasho wrote: ↑Fri Jun 28, 2019 8:45 am
Say no to Russell. He will cost way more than hes worth. Hes an inefficient volume scorer who got 19 shots a game to score 21 points on a mediocre eastern conference team. He doesnt even deserve to get Lavine money imo.
Hard to point at one stat and say he sucks, heck he even is a pretty good shooter:
He isn't good at all when it comes to getting to the FT% so that's a legitimate gripe. But considering the fact he shot 37% last year on 7.8 3's a game means he will generate a lot of gravity and drastically open up space on this team.
He is a PG that can run the team and is good at getting others involved. His impact on the court also took a massive leap last year.
He's not perfect by any means but if we can essentially get him while moving Wiggins then it is a no brainer. He would drastically improve this team so much with the addition of him and the subtraction of Wiggins.
“We will protect the fanbase from Glen Taylor” -Alex Rodriguez.
Marc Lore - “I don’t care if that wrinkly old chicken roaster has a few more hairs on his head than I do, a deal is a deal.”
Teams are talking to Rosas because Rosas is acting panicked and power drunk. Trading a starter to move up 5 spots to 1.06 to draft a back up is one example. Giving away firsts, seconds and a starter on the last year of a deal (Teague) to bail out NJ to free up space for FAs are all scrambling moves with no long term value.
By now, you know Rosas’ background. He spent 17 seasons with the Rockets, rising in the organization while becoming one of the most respected “behind the scenes” front office members in the NBA. He helped orchestrate bringing James Harden, Chris Paul and Clint Capela to Houston.
NotRasho wrote: ↑Fri Jun 28, 2019 8:45 am
Say no to Russell. He will cost way more than hes worth. Hes an inefficient volume scorer who got 19 shots a game to score 21 points on a mediocre eastern conference team. He doesnt even deserve to get Lavine money imo.
With you on that. Rozier will get less, and while he also doesn't score efficiently he plays wicked D. And it wouldn't be 3rd team/future picks to get him. Yeah you'd have to move Wigs at less than premium but we're out there diminishing him as an asset every day since the draft. Might want to just move on that.
qrocks wrote: ↑Fri Jun 28, 2019 9:10 am
Teams are talking to Rosas because Rosas is acting panicked and power drunk. Trading a starter to move up 5 spots to 1.06 to draft a back up is one example. Giving away firsts, seconds and a starter on the last year of a deal (Teague) to bail out NJ to free up space for FAs are all scrambling moves with no long term value.
By now, you know Rosas’ background. He spent 17 seasons with the Rockets, rising in the organization while becoming one of the most respected “behind the scenes” front office members in the NBA. He helped orchestrate bringing James Harden, Chris Paul and Clint Capela to Houston.
NotRasho wrote: ↑Fri Jun 28, 2019 8:45 am
Say no to Russell. He will cost way more than hes worth. Hes an inefficient volume scorer who got 19 shots a game to score 21 points on a mediocre eastern conference team. He doesnt even deserve to get Lavine money imo.
Hard to point at one stat and say he sucks, heck he even is a pretty good shooter:
He isn't good at all when it comes to getting to the FT% so that's a legitimate gripe. But considering the fact he shot 37% last year on 7.8 3's a game means he will generate a lot of gravity and drastically open up space on this team.
He is a PG that can run the team and is good at getting others involved. His impact on the court also took a massive leap last year.
He's not perfect by any means but if we can essentially get him while moving Wiggins then it is a no brainer. He would drastically improve this team so much with the addition of him and the subtraction of Wiggins.
but at some point though you have to put up the stop sign if you hit a certain cost point, and I fear we may have hit that with the way that story was going about giving up multiple picks.
*Next year's draft is super deep at PG, so we can always still find our PG of the future there and have him be cost controlled for 4 years and under team control for 7.
*We can still trade Teague to fill other holes, or use him in a bigger package to facilitate other deals.
Russell was a luxury in my opinion that is worth it if you can get him "cheaply," but if we're now having to ensure a max deal AND give up multiple picks, then I think I'm out.
2025 Froob NBA Draft
Billups, Lillard, Moncrief
Wade, Harden, Petrovic
Bird, George, Marion
Nowitzki, Barkley, Anthony
Russell, A Sabonis, Parish
NotRasho wrote: ↑Fri Jun 28, 2019 8:45 am
Say no to Russell. He will cost way more than hes worth. Hes an inefficient volume scorer who got 19 shots a game to score 21 points on a mediocre eastern conference team. He doesnt even deserve to get Lavine money imo.
Welcome back from purgatory!
It feels treacherous. I got used to prison life, the outside world is scary.
NotRasho wrote: ↑Fri Jun 28, 2019 8:45 am
Say no to Russell. He will cost way more than hes worth. Hes an inefficient volume scorer who got 19 shots a game to score 21 points on a mediocre eastern conference team. He doesnt even deserve to get Lavine money imo.
Hard to point at one stat and say he sucks, heck he even is a pretty good shooter:
He isn't good at all when it comes to getting to the FT% so that's a legitimate gripe. But considering the fact he shot 37% last year on 7.8 3's a game means he will generate a lot of gravity and drastically open up space on this team.
He is a PG that can run the team and is good at getting others involved. His impact on the court also took a massive leap last year.
He's not perfect by any means but if we can essentially get him while moving Wiggins then it is a no brainer. He would drastically improve this team so much with the addition of him and the subtraction of Wiggins.
but at some point though you have to put up the stop sign if you hit a certain cost point, and I fear we may have hit that with the way that story was going about giving up multiple picks.
*Next year's draft is super deep at PG, so we can always still find our PG of the future there and have him be cost controlled for 4 years and under team control for 7.
*We can still trade Teague to fill other holes, or use him in a bigger package to facilitate other deals.
Russell was a luxury in my opinion that is worth it if you can get him "cheaply," but if we're now having to ensure a max deal AND give up multiple picks, then I think I'm out.
Of course. But with this nugget (and who the hell knows if it's true but it is interesting...)
Lowe (cont.): "He said 'they are not gonna have to pay to get off Wiggins. It's gonna be at worst a neutral deal or someone's gonna pay them to get Wiggins.'" (3/3)
I'd be all for dumping Wiggins and signing Russell. I'd much rather not give him a max but gun to my head right now I'd do it.
“We will protect the fanbase from Glen Taylor” -Alex Rodriguez.
Marc Lore - “I don’t care if that wrinkly old chicken roaster has a few more hairs on his head than I do, a deal is a deal.”
He isn't good at all when it comes to getting to the FT% so that's a legitimate gripe. But considering the fact he shot 37% last year on 7.8 3's a game means he will generate a lot of gravity and drastically open up space on this team.
He is a PG that can run the team and is good at getting others involved. His impact on the court also took a massive leap last year.
He's not perfect by any means but if we can essentially get him while moving Wiggins then it is a no brainer. He would drastically improve this team so much with the addition of him and the subtraction of Wiggins.
but at some point though you have to put up the stop sign if you hit a certain cost point, and I fear we may have hit that with the way that story was going about giving up multiple picks.
*Next year's draft is super deep at PG, so we can always still find our PG of the future there and have him be cost controlled for 4 years and under team control for 7.
*We can still trade Teague to fill other holes, or use him in a bigger package to facilitate other deals.
Russell was a luxury in my opinion that is worth it if you can get him "cheaply," but if we're now having to ensure a max deal AND give up multiple picks, then I think I'm out.
Of course. But with this nugget (and who the hell knows if it's true but it is interesting...)
Lowe (cont.): "He said 'they are not gonna have to pay to get off Wiggins. It's gonna be at worst a neutral deal or someone's gonna pay them to get Wiggins.'" (3/3)
I'd be all for dumping Wiggins and signing Russell. I'd much rather not give him a max but gun to my head right now I'd do it.
they're not mutually exclusive though. You can do the Wiggins trade and still not turn around and overpay to get Russell.
Just keep those assets we thought we would have had to use to unload Wiggins and use them in other ways of improving the team, while finding PG of the future next year.
2025 Froob NBA Draft
Billups, Lillard, Moncrief
Wade, Harden, Petrovic
Bird, George, Marion
Nowitzki, Barkley, Anthony
Russell, A Sabonis, Parish
Mplsfonz wrote: ↑Fri Jun 28, 2019 1:03 pm
Does DLo play D?
That's the knock on Wiggins.
Personally I would like to keep Wiggins and trade JT and or Deing,
Not really, but the hope would be surrounding him by many great perimeter defenders like Culver, Okogie, RoCo would minimize his deficiencies.
It all depends how far the Wolves have to go backwards in any deal. If the Wolves have to give up Covington, Okogie or possibly Culver then it’s not a good deal at all and takes this Team even further backwards.
Mplsfonz wrote: ↑Fri Jun 28, 2019 1:03 pm
Does DLo play D?
That's the knock on Wiggins.
Personally I would like to keep Wiggins and trade JT and or Deing,
Not really, but the hope would be surrounding him by many great perimeter defenders like Culver, Okogie, RoCo would minimize his deficiencies.
It all depends how far the Wolves have to go backwards in any deal. If the Wolves have to give up Covington, Okogie or possibly Culver then it’s not a good deal at all and takes this Team even further backwards.
I was just saying hypothetically first off, not that I'm on board.
But even if we did move one of those 3, again hypothetically, you would eventually find a replacement. If we got Russell, we wouldn't have to take a PG next year and could use that pick (presuming it doesn't go out in said Russell trade) on one of the top PF/C as there are a good amount of those as well.
You would also still be able to trade Wiggins and perhaps bring back a defensive PF, so that balances the roster too.
2025 Froob NBA Draft
Billups, Lillard, Moncrief
Wade, Harden, Petrovic
Bird, George, Marion
Nowitzki, Barkley, Anthony
Russell, A Sabonis, Parish
Not really, but the hope would be surrounding him by many great perimeter defenders like Culver, Okogie, RoCo would minimize his deficiencies.
It all depends how far the Wolves have to go backwards in any deal. If the Wolves have to give up Covington, Okogie or possibly Culver then it’s not a good deal at all and takes this Team even further backwards.
I was just saying hypothetically first off, not that I'm on board.
But even if we did move one of those 3, again hypothetically, you would eventually find a replacement. If we got Russell, we wouldn't have to take a PG next year and could use that pick (presuming it doesn't go out in said Russell trade) on one of the top PF/C as there are a good amount of those as well.
You would also still be able to trade Wiggins and perhaps bring back a defensive PF, so that balances the roster too.
You should draft a PG next year even with Russell. Talent develops tatent and it s DEEP. If you get a top pick you might have an option, but it is weak at PF and we really don't need Center or SF.
It all depends how far the Wolves have to go backwards in any deal. If the Wolves have to give up Covington, Okogie or possibly Culver then it’s not a good deal at all and takes this Team even further backwards.
I was just saying hypothetically first off, not that I'm on board.
But even if we did move one of those 3, again hypothetically, you would eventually find a replacement. If we got Russell, we wouldn't have to take a PG next year and could use that pick (presuming it doesn't go out in said Russell trade) on one of the top PF/C as there are a good amount of those as well.
You would also still be able to trade Wiggins and perhaps bring back a defensive PF, so that balances the roster too.
You should draft a PG next year even with Russell. Talent develops tatent and it s DEEP. If you get a top pick you might have an option, but it is weak at PF and we really don't need Center or SF.
I'd have no objection to them going PG next year, I agree talent does develop talent. However, I do think there will be plenty of options for front court still, which is what I was trying to convey with the previous statement.
Since the PG crop is so deep, it pushes down the front court talent and even a late lottery pick could get us a chance at one of Wiseman, McDaniels, Sylla, Achiuwa, or Stewart, which could all fit nicely next to Culver, RoCo, Towns if Okogie was the one to go out.
But if we're able to move Wiggins for a starting big, we could definitely still go PG bpa next year if that's how the board shapes up.
I wanted to mainly convey that there are still plenty of opportunities to balance out the roster.
2025 Froob NBA Draft
Billups, Lillard, Moncrief
Wade, Harden, Petrovic
Bird, George, Marion
Nowitzki, Barkley, Anthony
Russell, A Sabonis, Parish
populousample wrote: ↑Fri Jun 28, 2019 2:03 pm
Would you rather add a future first to Teague and Dieng vs. trading Wiggins?
I never want to trade a future asset.
Too many variables. My bet, with our luck, we would trade a 2021 unprotected pick, finish middle of the road like always, and jump from #13 up to #1....And that pick goes to the nets.
