RealGM

For the record, the Krapinsky quote that I disagreed with was that Gasol was "well worth his contract."

It's an interesting discussion, but nobody is agreeing that Pau Gasol is "well worth his contract."

Krapinsky wrote:I think it says something that in the same beat people can say he's "overpaid" but then say he has "positive trade value." IMO those are mutually exclusive positions. Maybe you can rationalize that for everyone? How can a player be overpaid and at the same time have positive trade value? Because your wolves forum thesis throughout the years has always treated them one in the same.

Sure - it's economics.

If you're dying of thirst in the desert, and someone offers you a glass of water for $1000 - the water is overpaid, but it's worth it to you because you don't want to die. If we are being precise, assets do not have an overall value -- they have a specific value to the seller and the buyer.

However, if you're dying of thirst in the desert, and someone offers you a glass of water for $1000 and someone else offers you one for $500 - the first glass if overpaid and NOT worth it to you.

This is the situation with Pau Gasol, and in the NBA in general. We can use a shorthand of a general "trade value" because the NBA is a market, and for most players, you can choose to offer your trade package for someone else. A buyer tries to get the best value he can from whoever will give him the most for his assets.

Gasol is an entity who's skill-set, injury history, risk of success or decline and salary have a specific value to MIN. But the questions are: Is MIN really dying of thirst in the desert? And does MIN specifically need Gasol, so that no other glasses of water would help them?

Of course not. MIN isn't winning a title this year with or without Gasol, or probably anyone else they could get. With his health, he doesn't even insure the playoffs. Moreover Gasol plays positions where they are particularly strong already. there should be no question that Gasol is overpaid, but I would also contend that he should not have positive trade value to MIN when they can explore other avenues in trade, or not trade at all.

shrink wrote:

Krapinsky wrote:I think it says something that in the same beat people can say he's "overpaid" but then say he has "positive trade value." IMO those are mutually exclusive positions. Maybe you can rationalize that for everyone? How can a player be overpaid and at the same time have positive trade value? Because your wolves forum thesis throughout the years has always treated them one in the same.

Sure - it's economics.

If you're dying of thirst in the desert, and someone offers you a glass of water for $1000 - the water is overpaid, but it's worth it to you because you don't want to die. If we are being precise, assets do not have an overall value -- they have a specific value to the seller and the buyer.

However, if you're dying of thirst in the desert, and someone offers you a glass of water for $1000 and someone else offers you one for $500 - the first glass if overpaid and NOT worth it to you.

This is the situation with Pau Gasol, and in the NBA in general. Gasol is an entity who's skill-set, injury history, risk of success or decline and salary have a specific value to MIN. However, does MIN specifically need Gasol, so that no other glasses of water would help them? Of course not - in fact Gasol plays a position where they are particularly strong already. Gasol should not have positive trade value to MIN when they can explore other avenues in trade, or later in free agency.

Good post. I'm all into Gasol from the past, but he's not getting any younger. Yes, I know about Kings and Divac case, but that was only one case. And Gasol is injury-prone, which can ruin us as we don't have a decent back-up center, and we would play Gasol a lot more minutes than Lakers did recently, as they had Bynum and have Howard now. That would make him even more injury-prone.

[RCG] wrote:

Cashin out wrote:What do you guys think about Dwill's game is he in the wrong system or is he just a a draft bust?

He's been good when he's played. Not a draft bust. Our announcer Jim Peterson, really likes the kid. I think it has more to do with Adelman preferring older guys than anything else.

That's just not true, he has not been good. He's pretty clearly been bad.

Cashin out wrote:What do you guys think about Dwill's game is he in the wrong system or is he just a a draft bust?

Everyone has different opinions on this, and it's based on not just Williams, but how you assess risk and the development of rookies in general.

Overall Williams has not been good. He missed out when he had an opportunity to play more minutes when Love was out. People say he's a tweener, and he doesn't make good basketball decisions. He showed commitment in the off-season by losing weight, but he didn't seem to develop his game as much as people wanted.

On the other hand, he has good athleticism, and he shows "flashes." Last game he had 2 points in 10 minutes. However, the game before he had 10 points in 15 minutes, and the game before that he had 10 boards in 16 minutes.

For an NBA rookie, we ignore the overall numbers and if a player has athleticism and flashes, we extrapolate that he can build on those and become a good NBA player. But Derrick Williams is in his second year - should he only be held to the standards of a rookie? You be the judge - he had no training camp or pre-season his rookie year because of the strike, and he's only played 80 games in his career.

Since you brought up the system, let me add that Adelman is win-now, and Cunningham has played well and earned his respect. I think though that Adelman is a master of putting limited players in limited situations where they can succeed, and in some instances, I think that's helped Williams. In general though, I think another team, who was win-later and willing to develop Williams, would clearly get more value from him. He still has high upside, even if his chance of reaching it is dwindling. Moreover, it's a rare set of circumstances that have allowed such a high draft pick to even be available this early in his career -- an opportunity for a team that wants to take a chance.

[RCG] wrote:

Cashin out wrote:What do you guys think about Dwill's game is he in the wrong system or is he just a a draft bust?

He's been good when he's played. Not a draft bust. Our announcer Jim Peterson, really likes the kid. I think it has more to do with Adelman preferring older guys than anything else.

He has been a steaming pile of poo on offense. He just doesn't know what to do.
Defensively he's been okay, but okay won't cut it, when CunningHAM can give you the same level of defense, but with better rebounding, energy and smart opportunistic offense.

Tirion wrote:Memphis, OKC, SAS, LAC.

I don't see how the Wolves can beat any of this teams without another starting caliber wing.

We could use another SG, but I'm not sure how good we are yet. OKC would be pretty tough, but we might have a fighting chance against the other 3. We played pretty well against the Clippers and SA last year.

I haven't read every post in this thread, so I apologize if this was already brought up, but I think the fact there are rumors of us sending Pekovic out is sign that we aren't necessarily interested in signing him to a big contract long term. Of course these are all rumors, but I don't know if I can disagree. I love Pek at about 9 million or so a year, but with his UFA coming up, perhaps it is worth it to cash in when we can. If we can pull in Gasol and a decent wing player, I may be in. I hate Gasols contract, but it is coming to an end. Do we really want Pekovic at a max or near max deal for the next 5 years?

champalift wrote:I haven't read every post in this thread, so I apologize if this was already brought up, but I think the fact there are rumors of us sending Pekovic out is sign that we aren't necessarily interested in signing him to a big contract long term. Of course these are all rumors, but I don't know if I can disagree. I love Pek at about 9 million or so a year, but with his UFA coming up, perhaps it is worth it to cash in when we can. If we can pull in Gasol and a decent wing player, I may be in. I hate Gasols contract, but it is coming to an end. Do we really want Pekovic at a max or near max deal for the next 5 years?

Pekovic will get a 4 year contract at most.

As long as I can remember there have been rumors of bad deals with big market teams. We all remember the Rubio to the Knicks rumors. I'm just not sure how seriously we should take this. It could just be the Lakers trying to inflate Pau's value.

Worm Guts wrote:

champalift wrote:I haven't read every post in this thread, so I apologize if this was already brought up, but I think the fact there are rumors of us sending Pekovic out is sign that we aren't necessarily interested in signing him to a big contract long term. Of course these are all rumors, but I don't know if I can disagree. I love Pek at about 9 million or so a year, but with his UFA coming up, perhaps it is worth it to cash in when we can. If we can pull in Gasol and a decent wing player, I may be in. I hate Gasols contract, but it is coming to an end. Do we really want Pekovic at a max or near max deal for the next 5 years?

Pekovic will get a 4 year contract at most.

Okay, some new CBA, UFA thing if I recall?
Regardless, four years at 15m for Pek? Think of what that does to us financially when Ricky and Love expire. Would hate to be handcuffed with those guys.

I don't really expect Pek to get that much. I'm fairly confident he wouldn't if FA were tomorrow, probably more like 10-11 million. I think we need wait longer on this decision.

Worm Guts wrote:

champalift wrote:Pekovic will get a 4 year contract at most.

Okay, some new CBA, UFA thing if I recall?
Regardless, four years at 15m for Pek? Think of what that does to us financially when Ricky and Love expire. Would hate to be handcuffed with those guys.

You're right. The max Pek could get would be four years at about $58 mil, with the first year at about $13.5. Even if Pek suddenly erupted, there's no way MIN would waste it's five year deal on anyone but Rubio.

However, even though he's a center, it's unlikely anyone is going to give him the max. He simply hasn't deserved it. I think 4 for $42 is more than fair, but his future play this season will havea big impact on where that number falls.

The one caveat here is that it's possible a team makes an offer that's over-priced, and we have to decide whether to match it. We did it to POR last year, and Paul Allen has the cap space and the deep pockets to do it back to us this summer. Still, the choice to match is fully our own, and most of these situations end up in a sign-and-trade anyway.

In the end, I do not think holding onto Pek is a bad thing, to see what develops.

shrink wrote:For the record, the Krapinsky quote that I disagreed with was that Gasol was "well worth his contract."

It's an interesting discussion, but nobody is agreeing that Pau Gasol is "well worth his contract."

For the record, I believe this post gives proper context --

shrink wrote:

Krapinsky wrote:

shrink wrote:That's true. On the other hand, Pek may be worth his contract .. Gasol certainly isn't. And locking up a center in Pek may not be such a bad thing either.

I don't know how I feel about this issue from a perspective on franchise value

If Gasol isn't worth his contract then why is there a trade market for him that returns positive assets? That tells me that despite your POV, the market says he's worth his contract.

Oh? Who's saying that?

Toss the idea out on the neutral trade board that "Gasol is well worth his contract" and you'll get blasted by 29 different teams.

I looked and could not find any post where I said he was "well" worth his contract. I'm not trying to backtrack. I think if he has a positive trade value then he is worth his contract, but i think you added "well worth" to create some safe distance for yourself.

Just checked in here as I think the debate was fascinating on the T&T board, and wanted to say thanks for bringing it over. I posted it there, but I'm giving it to shrink if you guys can split the concepts of overpaid and trade value, otherwise its looking a tie for me.



Also, wanted to add:

shrink wrote:Even if Pek suddenly erupted, there's no way MIN would waste it's five year deal on anyone but Rubio.

Pek can't be extended, and the single 5 year limit is just on (rookie) deal extensions so Minnesota could give him a 5 year deal next summer and still have its 5 year extension for Rubio.

Krapinsky wrote:You can certainly pick and choose as you may. I believe the Wolves dismissed the Love for Gasol rumors. These rumors haven't been dismissed by anyone yet.

And...

Jon Krawczynski ‏@APkrawczynski

Kahn calls reports of #TWolves talks with #Lakers "erroneous." Says they haven't talked since June.

Jon Krawczynski ‏@APkrawczynski

Kahn says "nothing imminent" on trade front.

Jon Krawczynski ‏@APkrawczynski

Sounds like Kahn wants to wait to see where Wolves are at when Rubio returns before deciding on making any moves.

Jerry Zgoda ‏@JerryZgoda

Kahn basically said there's nothing to trade rumors, says he hasn't talked to Lakers, calls it unfair to players

... there you go.

"He" hasn't talked to the Lakers, doesn't mean somebody else didn't make a phone call. I still think based on Doogie's reports that Kahn/Adelman are still very intrigued by Gasol. Since a deal can't be worked out by Dec. 15th (Roy), i think things will quiet down until then, which should give LA and MN in opportunity to see their teams at full strength first. Certainly makes sense for all parties involved to be patient for now.

Krapinsky wrote:"He" hasn't talked to the Lakers,

Kahn calls reports of #TWolves talks with #Lakers "erroneous." Says they haven't talked since June.

AQuintus wrote:

Krapinsky wrote:"He" hasn't talked to the Lakers,

Kahn calls reports of #TWolves talks with #Lakers "erroneous." Says they haven't talked since June.

But...but, that could mean Kahn and his...wife! You don't know who they are!

AQuintus wrote:

Krapinsky wrote:"He" hasn't talked to the Lakers,

Kahn calls reports of #TWolves talks with #Lakers "erroneous." Says they haven't talked since June.

I'd like to hear the audio on that.