Trade Talk (Part Six)
Moderators: Domejandro, Worm Guts, Calinks
Re: Trade Talk (Part Six)
-
Klomp
- Retired Mod

- Posts: 69,758
- And1: 23,086
- Joined: Jul 08, 2005
- Contact:
-
Re: Trade Talk (Part Six)
Any deal discussion was about team improvement in 2021-22. This season frankly is lost. We aren't making the playoffs. Whether or not the pick is conveyed this year or next year doesn't alter much in the grand scheme of things. So it's about next year. Trading for Gordon we'd be trading assets for someone who would be an expiring contract next year. Atlanta wasn't willing to trade Collins. Cleveland wasn't willing to trade Nance.
tsherkin wrote:The important thing to take away here is that Klomp is wrong.
Esohny wrote:Why are you asking Klomp? "He's" actually a bot that posts random blurbs from a database.
Klomp wrote:I'm putting the tired in retired mod at the moment
Re: Trade Talk (Part Six)
-
Jedzz
- RealGM
- Posts: 12,322
- And1: 2,506
- Joined: Oct 05, 2018
Re: Trade Talk (Part Six)
Calinks wrote:4. Luck is big. He has been pretty damn unlucky at times and lucky in others. He was extremely unlucky this season with KAT going down, getting covid, DLo injury, Beasley off-season drama, You just can't predict that stuff and it has had a massive effect on this team.
For some reason these things always seem to be the season excuse. Maybe this one more than others but all the same...
Re: Trade Talk (Part Six)
-
Baseline81
- Analyst
- Posts: 3,277
- And1: 1,909
- Joined: Jan 18, 2009
Re: Trade Talk (Part Six)
Klomp wrote:Okogie and Culver won't change much on the trade market. They won't bring you a starting PF. Rubio stays for leadership and probably not a great market for him either. For the rest it goes back to wanting to see the group together (ie Towns, Russell, Edwards, Beasley).
Sure, you may not have got back a PF. If their value isn't high, why not try to get a second-round pick or an expiring contract in exchange? Do we really want to be paying Culver $6.4M next year?
Re: Trade Talk (Part Six)
- karch34
- Lead Assistant
- Posts: 5,888
- And1: 864
- Joined: Jul 05, 2001
- Location: Valley of the Sun
-
Re: Trade Talk (Part Six)
moonpie wrote:
I'd gamble since we still have the open roster spot.
Re: Trade Talk (Part Six)
-
Baseline81
- Analyst
- Posts: 3,277
- And1: 1,909
- Joined: Jan 18, 2009
Re: Trade Talk (Part Six)
karch34 wrote:I'd gamble since we still have the open roster spot.
Think I'd rather Hollis-Jefferson back.
Re: Trade Talk (Part Six)
-
shrink
- RealGM
- Posts: 59,646
- And1: 19,742
- Joined: Sep 26, 2005
Re: Trade Talk (Part Six)
Well, doing nothing was better that Rosas last deadline ..! Seriously though, a few thoughts.
1. The roster is unbalanced. Saying, “I want to see this team together” doesn’t negate that you don’t have enough minutes at guard to optimize the players on this team.
2. Trade value is a constantly changing commodity. Our best players missed a lot of games this season, and the only plus to that is that it provided minutes to players we normally wouldn’t see. It takes minutes to boost trade value, and the lack of minutes when the core players get back willhurt the trade value, and development, of our youth.
3. As the trade deadline progressed, I thought more opportunities came up to get into deals. As I posted earlier, the earlier surprise move of Vucevic to Chicago increased the value of Rubio there (age and direction fit). The teams who had a need for Norman Powell who missed out could have maintained some of their direction with a trade for Beasley. But more importantly, I think there were smaller trades that may have been out there that benefited the Wolves and our trade partners. With so many teams being “win-now,” getting a 2nd or cap relief to help improve a team’s bench would have been worthwhile.
4. On a positive note, I an happy that we didn’t see the Wolves compound previous errors, betting big on one guy to come in and turn our fortunes around. The team still has to grow, but Rosas didn’t us better, or help us grow.
1. The roster is unbalanced. Saying, “I want to see this team together” doesn’t negate that you don’t have enough minutes at guard to optimize the players on this team.
2. Trade value is a constantly changing commodity. Our best players missed a lot of games this season, and the only plus to that is that it provided minutes to players we normally wouldn’t see. It takes minutes to boost trade value, and the lack of minutes when the core players get back willhurt the trade value, and development, of our youth.
3. As the trade deadline progressed, I thought more opportunities came up to get into deals. As I posted earlier, the earlier surprise move of Vucevic to Chicago increased the value of Rubio there (age and direction fit). The teams who had a need for Norman Powell who missed out could have maintained some of their direction with a trade for Beasley. But more importantly, I think there were smaller trades that may have been out there that benefited the Wolves and our trade partners. With so many teams being “win-now,” getting a 2nd or cap relief to help improve a team’s bench would have been worthwhile.
4. On a positive note, I an happy that we didn’t see the Wolves compound previous errors, betting big on one guy to come in and turn our fortunes around. The team still has to grow, but Rosas didn’t us better, or help us grow.
Sign5 wrote:Yea not happening, I expected a better retort but what do I expect from realgm(ers) in 2025. Just quote and state things that lack context, then repeat the same thing over and over as if something new and profound was said. Just lol.
Re: Trade Talk (Part Six)
-
Calinks
- Forum Mod - Timberwolves

- Posts: 50,419
- And1: 17,377
- Joined: Mar 29, 2006
-
Re: Trade Talk (Part Six)
Jedzz wrote:Calinks wrote:4. Luck is big. He has been pretty damn unlucky at times and lucky in others. He was extremely unlucky this season with KAT going down, getting covid, DLo injury, Beasley off-season drama, You just can't predict that stuff and it has had a massive effect on this team.
For some reason these things always seem to be the season excuse. Maybe this one more than others but all the same...
True but I think this franchise also has horrendous luck. I mean, Flip came back, things were looking good, he gets cancer and dies. We get Thibs and he gets Butler, things seem good, Butler has a historic meltdown and our team is in shambles. Our star players mother dies of Covid, we trade for his best friend and because of injuries they play 5 games together in 18 months. Beasley does something extremely stupid while he's chilling at home, etc.
Just really stupid/random bad stuff happens to us a lot. It happens to all teams but it still sucks and can set you back.
When luck shuts the door skill comes in through the window.
Re: Trade Talk (Part Six)
-
Klomp
- Retired Mod

- Posts: 69,758
- And1: 23,086
- Joined: Jul 08, 2005
- Contact:
-
Re: Trade Talk (Part Six)
Baseline81 wrote:Klomp wrote:Okogie and Culver won't change much on the trade market. They won't bring you a starting PF. Rubio stays for leadership and probably not a great market for him either. For the rest it goes back to wanting to see the group together (ie Towns, Russell, Edwards, Beasley).
Sure, you may not have got back a PF. If their value isn't high, why not try to get a second-round pick or an expiring contract in exchange? Do we really want to be paying Culver $6.4M next year?
Maybe they did try? Or maybe we feel their value to us is more than that?
tsherkin wrote:The important thing to take away here is that Klomp is wrong.
Esohny wrote:Why are you asking Klomp? "He's" actually a bot that posts random blurbs from a database.
Klomp wrote:I'm putting the tired in retired mod at the moment
Re: Trade Talk (Part Six)
-
Merc_Porto
- General Manager
- Posts: 9,941
- And1: 3,540
- Joined: Nov 21, 2013
-
Re: Trade Talk (Part Six)
Klomp wrote:Any deal discussion was about team improvement in 2021-22. This season frankly is lost. We aren't making the playoffs. Whether or not the pick is conveyed this year or next year doesn't alter much in the grand scheme of things. So it's about next year. Trading for Gordon we'd be trading assets for someone who would be an expiring contract next year. Atlanta wasn't willing to trade Collins. Cleveland wasn't willing to trade Nance.
So much nonsense from you today.
Re: Trade Talk (Part Six)
-
Klomp
- Retired Mod

- Posts: 69,758
- And1: 23,086
- Joined: Jul 08, 2005
- Contact:
-
Re: Trade Talk (Part Six)
Calinks wrote:Jedzz wrote:Calinks wrote:4. Luck is big. He has been pretty damn unlucky at times and lucky in others. He was extremely unlucky this season with KAT going down, getting covid, DLo injury, Beasley off-season drama, You just can't predict that stuff and it has had a massive effect on this team.
For some reason these things always seem to be the season excuse. Maybe this one more than others but all the same...
True but I think this franchise also has horrendous luck. I mean, Flip came back, things were looking good, he gets cancer and dies. We get Thibs and he gets Butler, things seem good, Butler has a historic meltdown and our team is in shambles. Our star players mother dies of Covid, we trade for his best friend and because of injuries they play 5 games together in 18 months. Beasley does something extremely stupid while he's chilling at home, etc.
Just really stupid/random bad stuff happens to us a lot. It happens to all teams but it still sucks and can set you back.
Do we need to go into our lottery (lack of) luck?
tsherkin wrote:The important thing to take away here is that Klomp is wrong.
Esohny wrote:Why are you asking Klomp? "He's" actually a bot that posts random blurbs from a database.
Klomp wrote:I'm putting the tired in retired mod at the moment
Re: Trade Talk (Part Six)
-
Klomp
- Retired Mod

- Posts: 69,758
- And1: 23,086
- Joined: Jul 08, 2005
- Contact:
-
Re: Trade Talk (Part Six)
Merc_Porto wrote:Klomp wrote:Any deal discussion was about team improvement in 2021-22. This season frankly is lost. We aren't making the playoffs. Whether or not the pick is conveyed this year or next year doesn't alter much in the grand scheme of things. So it's about next year. Trading for Gordon we'd be trading assets for someone who would be an expiring contract next year. Atlanta wasn't willing to trade Collins. Cleveland wasn't willing to trade Nance.
So much nonsense from you today.
What does it change? In the next two years, we are losing one pick. Why does it really matter if it's this year or next year?
tsherkin wrote:The important thing to take away here is that Klomp is wrong.
Esohny wrote:Why are you asking Klomp? "He's" actually a bot that posts random blurbs from a database.
Klomp wrote:I'm putting the tired in retired mod at the moment
Re: Trade Talk (Part Six)
-
Baseline81
- Analyst
- Posts: 3,277
- And1: 1,909
- Joined: Jan 18, 2009
Re: Trade Talk (Part Six)
Klomp wrote:What does it change? In the next two years, we are losing one pick. Why does it really matter if it's this year or next year?
There's a vast difference in whether the Wolves lose the pick this year than next.
As Calinks pointed out, the season has been unlucky, even by Wolves' standards. The amount of time missed by key players due to injuries, suspension and Covid-19 is shocking. Maybe I'm too optimistic, but if the Wolves are able to hold onto their pick, I don't see them being in the same predicament next season. They may finish outside the playoffs again, but not bottom 3.
Re: Trade Talk (Part Six)
-
Merc_Porto
- General Manager
- Posts: 9,941
- And1: 3,540
- Joined: Nov 21, 2013
-
Re: Trade Talk (Part Six)
Klomp wrote:Merc_Porto wrote:Klomp wrote:Any deal discussion was about team improvement in 2021-22. This season frankly is lost. We aren't making the playoffs. Whether or not the pick is conveyed this year or next year doesn't alter much in the grand scheme of things. So it's about next year. Trading for Gordon we'd be trading assets for someone who would be an expiring contract next year. Atlanta wasn't willing to trade Collins. Cleveland wasn't willing to trade Nance.
So much nonsense from you today.
What does it change? In the next two years, we are losing one pick. Why does it really matter if it's this year or next year?
Why? Come on Klomp
A top-3 pick this season would change everything. Would give us another HUGE asset to improve the roster by trade or by drafting the best guy available.
And by improving the team for next season you are increasing the chances of giving Golden State a worse pick (range) in 2022.
Re: Trade Talk (Part Six)
-
ClarkeW
- Sophomore
- Posts: 116
- And1: 54
- Joined: Nov 28, 2019
-
Re: Trade Talk (Part Six)
Baseline81 wrote:Klomp wrote:What does it change? In the next two years, we are losing one pick. Why does it really matter if it's this year or next year?
There's a vast difference in whether the Wolves lose the pick this year than next.
As Calinks pointed out, the season has been unlucky, even by Wolves' standards. The amount of time missed by key players due to injuries, suspension and Covid-19 is shocking. Maybe I'm too optimistic, but if the Wolves are able to hold onto their pick, I don't see them being in the same predicament next season. They may finish outside the playoffs again, but not bottom 3.
I think people vastly overrate what a top 3 pick is going to do for winning next year. This isn’t 2K. Like 95% of drafted players don’t actively contribute to winning in their rookie season. It takes at least a couple years in most cases. That’s why year after year the youngest teams in the NBA are always among those at the bottom of the standings at the end of the season.
Honestly, the Wolves might be better on the court next season if the pick does go to the Warriors this year. It might force us to bring in another veteran or two to shore up the roster, and then we can bring in our 2022 first round pick into a winning culture instead of what into whatever it is we have now.
Re: Trade Talk (Part Six)
-
shrink
- RealGM
- Posts: 59,646
- And1: 19,742
- Joined: Sep 26, 2005
Re: Trade Talk (Part Six)
Klomp wrote:Calinks wrote:True but I think this franchise also has horrendous luck. I mean, Flip came back, things were looking good, he gets cancer and dies. We get Thibs and he gets Butler, things seem good, Butler has a historic meltdown and our team is in shambles. Our star players mother dies of Covid, we trade for his best friend and because of injuries they play 5 games together in 18 months. Beasley does something extremely stupid while he's chilling at home, etc.
Just really stupid/random bad stuff happens to us a lot. It happens to all teams but it still sucks and can set you back.
Do we need to go into our lottery (lack of) luck?
And during the Garnett years, it seemed like we always had a major guard injured by the time the playoffs rolled around.
But when I have competed on teams, I always felt blaming losses on luck or officiating was weak. Those can certainly make it harder to win, but you and your team need to increase your margin over your competition so that neither of these regularly lead to losses.
Sign5 wrote:Yea not happening, I expected a better retort but what do I expect from realgm(ers) in 2025. Just quote and state things that lack context, then repeat the same thing over and over as if something new and profound was said. Just lol.
Re: Trade Talk (Part Six)
-
Merc_Porto
- General Manager
- Posts: 9,941
- And1: 3,540
- Joined: Nov 21, 2013
-
Re: Trade Talk (Part Six)
ClarkeW wrote:Baseline81 wrote:Klomp wrote:What does it change? In the next two years, we are losing one pick. Why does it really matter if it's this year or next year?
There's a vast difference in whether the Wolves lose the pick this year than next.
As Calinks pointed out, the season has been unlucky, even by Wolves' standards. The amount of time missed by key players due to injuries, suspension and Covid-19 is shocking. Maybe I'm too optimistic, but if the Wolves are able to hold onto their pick, I don't see them being in the same predicament next season. They may finish outside the playoffs again, but not bottom 3.
I think people vastly overrate what a top 3 pick is going to do for winning next year. This isn’t 2K. Like 95% of drafted players don’t actively contribute to winning in their rookie season. It takes at least a couple years in most cases. That’s why year after year the youngest teams in the NBA are always among those at the bottom of the standings at the end of the season.
Honestly, the Wolves might be better on the court next season if the pick does go to the Warriors this year. It might force us to bring in another veteran or two to shore up the roster, and then we can bring in our 2022 first round pick into a winning culture instead of what into whatever it is we have now.
Wow.
Is way more than just draft the best guy. A top-3 gives you so much opportunities to get better. Doesn't necessary means we have to even draft anybody in draft day.
Re: Trade Talk (Part Six)
-
IceManBK1
- Analyst
- Posts: 3,232
- And1: 330
- Joined: Jul 14, 2017
-
Re: Trade Talk (Part Six)
karch34 wrote:moonpie wrote:
I'd gamble since we still have the open roster spot.
Please pick him up Rosas.. Not the player he once was before. But his athleticism and scoring ability will give us a boost energy, scoring and rebounding wise. He can be a decent defender when he's focused. He's better as a starter and still better than any pf we have.
Re: Trade Talk (Part Six)
-
IceManBK1
- Analyst
- Posts: 3,232
- And1: 330
- Joined: Jul 14, 2017
-
Re: Trade Talk (Part Six)
Use the MLE on jabari Parker or LA please.
Re: Trade Talk (Part Six)
-
IceManBK1
- Analyst
- Posts: 3,232
- And1: 330
- Joined: Jul 14, 2017
-
Re: Trade Talk (Part Six)
We can still go after Randle or Collins in the off-season. If both teams unwilling to pay them max.
Re: Trade Talk (Part Six)
-
IceManBK1
- Analyst
- Posts: 3,232
- And1: 330
- Joined: Jul 14, 2017
-
Re: Trade Talk (Part Six)
Pick up jabari Parker and bring back RHJ....our pf spot will be solid with 2 seasoned Vets..
Return to Minnesota Timberwolves



