Lowe - Timberwolves Still Want D-Russell

[KGdaBom]

Read on Twitter

If the Lakers offer $20 million and we Offer Max which may be around $30 million (just guessing) he's as good as ours.

[TheZachAttack]

I don't think D-Lo is comparable to Wiggins, but I wouldn't give him the max either.

I will say I prefer Dlo at 27M at age 23 than Teague at 19M at age 31.

Dlo is definitely not max, but it may take it for him to choose us over a larger market team where he would recoup some of those dollars in endorsements. If we can unload Wiggins, I have no problem paying it because I expect him to thrive in the environment we're creating more so than Wiggins. And because I know that's the nature of the beast for small market teams....You overpay! Que será, será, Whatever will be will be!

Why is Dlo not a max?

Booker per 36 last season versus D Lo (same age)

Booker

27.3 PPG
7.0 APG
4.3 RPG

46.7 FG% / 53.6 2 PT% / 32.6 3 PT% (6.6 att/game) / 86.6 FT% (7 att/game) / 53.6 eFG%

Russell

25.2 PPG
8.3 APG
4.6 RPG

43.4 FG% / 48.2 2 PT% / 37 3 PT % (9 att/g) / 78 FT% (3 att/game) / 51.2 eFG%

[Killboard]

Maybe this is obvious, but somebody reassure me that signing Russell to the max isn’t adding the Wiggins deal all over?

In Russell, I see a young guy that performed below his lottery pick expectations, produces offensive counting stats without great efficiency, doesn’t defend, and you hope that with his youth, he grows to be worth the max deal.

1st. Russell carried his team to the playoffs (is the East but still) while being an all-star last season.

BRK was 42-40 playing primarily eastern conference opponents, 13-17 vs the West. If the schedule was normalized 50/50, BRK was a sub 500 team. Worse, their 42-40 record got them the sixth seed in the East, while if they were in the West, they’d have missed the playoffs by a wide margin. LAC got the 8th seed at 48-34, playing a western-heavy schedule.

As for the All Star game, he came in 9th. In the East. For guards. In fact, freakin’ Eric Bledsoe had a higher ranking from NBA players, and would have gotten that final Eastern All Star spot, but Russell got more fan votes - being from populated Brooklyn.

https://ak-static.cms.nba.com/wp-content/uploads/sites/46/2019/01/2019-Eastern-Conference-Guard-NBA-All-Star-Starter-Voting-Results.pdf

I think both the playoffs and all star accolades are as about as minimal as they come.

And I recognized it was in the east. It's a weak conference for sure beyond the 5th seed, but the Nets weren't full of talent neither, specially with Levert and Dinwiddie losing like 60 games combined. They exceeded expectations.

But my reasons weren't in order of importance, just that I think was important to point he contributed to win games.

[mg]

If it's going to make KAT happy you find a way to sign DLo.

[Klomp]

Read on Twitter

[Dewey]

If Russell can run PG with LeBoy and AD, he will ride their coat tails. but anyway.

Question: I don't think KAT has the recruiting power or this type of draw, and once he realizes it ...
1. He will look to bolt like AD to team up elsewhere.
2. He will stay the course and experience success with new changes.
3. He will lead a 2019-2020 splash of success and help draw key FA's next summer

[Macwolf527]

I will say I prefer Dlo at 27M at age 23 than Teague at 19M at age 31.

Dlo is definitely not max, but it may take it for him to choose us over a larger market team where he would recoup some of those dollars in endorsements. If we can unload Wiggins, I have no problem paying it because I expect him to thrive in the environment we're creating more so than Wiggins. And because I know that's the nature of the beast for small market teams....You overpay! Que será, será, Whatever will be will be!

Why is Dlo not a max?

Booker per 36 last season versus D Lo (same age)

Booker

27.3 PPG
7.0 APG
4.3 RPG

46.7 FG% / 53.6 2 PT% / 32.6 3 PT% (6.6 att/game) / 86.6 FT% (7 att/game) / 53.6 eFG%

Russell

25.2 PPG
8.3 APG
4.6 RPG

43.4 FG% / 48.2 2 PT% / 37 3 PT % (9 att/g) / 78 FT% (3 att/game) / 51.2 eFG%

Those numbers are skewed in Russell’s favor. Booker played on average against tougher competition out west. Booker was more likely to be guarded by bigger and stronger wings, Booker carried a greater percentage of his teams scoring load, whereas Russell spent more time off the ball and Booker is the better defender. Remember I didn’t say he wouldn’t get the max, I said he wasn’t worth it, just like Wiggins is not worth it. Matter a fact, put Booker on fringe championship caliber team, and he may not be worth it.

[GeekFreak]

Let's get Booker too! Isn't he like Towns very best friend in the entire league?

[Dalvin]

Meh, I still prefer to see Rubio. With all these talk about identity and challenging the norm, how about a lineup of Rubio-Culver-Okogie-Covington-Towns? Now that's a defensive identity! I know spacing is an issue there, but with all those athletes we could run them down every possession. If we can't shoot much in that lineup, the other team on the other hand won't be able to get a good shot also with all those good defenders stopping them.

[Crazy-Canuck]

Meh, I still prefer to see Rubio. With all these talk about identity and challenging the norm, how about a lineup of Rubio-Culver-Okogie-Covington-Towns? Now that's a defensive identity! I know spacing is an issue there, but with all those athletes we could run them down every possession. If we can't shoot much in that lineup, the other team on the other hand won't be able to get a good shot also with all those good defenders stopping them.

Cant shoot and cant score.

Defensively, youd still have either Okogie or Culver undersized against most SF's. Fouling will be another problem. Kat likes to foul. Okogie likes to foul. Culver most likely gets the rookie treatment from the refs.

Unless Culver turns into Paul Pierce overnight, that line up will have problems.

[King Malta]

Maybe this is obvious, but somebody reassure me that signing Russell to the max isn’t adding the Wiggins deal all over?

In Russell, I see a young guy that performed below his lottery pick expectations, produces offensive counting stats without great efficiency, doesn’t defend, and you hope that with his youth, he grows to be worth the max deal.

It's still risky no doubt because your're betting on continued improvement with a young player, but Wiggins he ain't. He's at least filling up the stat sheet and had a 19.4 PER last year and positive VORP of 3.3. Wiggins on the other hand sports a career high 16.4 PER and has never has a positive VORP.

I feel like when you're a team that is not a free agent destination (and let's not kid ourselves), you either have to tank and collect high draft picks, or take some risks on upside. With Towns and Roco in the fold, tanking doesn't seem to be an option. And I think when surveying the NBA landscape Russell is as good an upside play as there is right now.

This is probably the most valid point to be made about the pursuit of Russell IMO.

The two things that attract most free agents are a big market or the chance to win, historically we offer neither of each of those options. So when it comes to attracting top level talent our most realistic course of action is almost always going to be investing in a player who we feel has the ceiling to be a star rather than attracting an established one.

I understand the hesitancy around paying DLo the max, it's a risky move. But I honestly think it's a risk that we should be taking.

[trevor0333]

Canis Hoopus is not always the greatest with the CBA.

As I think I’ve demonstrated, clearing enough cap space to sign Russell is nearly impossible, or would cost too many assets to get it done since we are already over the cap.

A sign-and-trade makes some sense, but still has major flaws. Their deal is

MIN GIVES: Teague, 1st, 2nd
MIN GETS: Russell

BRK GIVES: Russell
BRK GETS: (cap space) + 2nd

Third Team GIVES: Cap Space
Third Team GETS: Teague, 1st.

If they do this deal after free agency opens (next year’s number), $19 mil of Teague doesn’t match $27.25 mil of Russell. They mention including okogie as well, and maybe KBD to match. Both players are worth much more to us than other teams.

If they do this deal before free agency opens, BRK would never agree. They don’t know if two better free agents will sign there yet, so they aren’t going to give away their rights to match until they’ve inked their stars.

And btw, if you really believe Russell is worth us giving up an expiring starter and a 1st, why wouldn’t the Third Team just cut us from the deal, and grab Russell for the same price - cap space a 2nd? Wouldn’t that be a better asset play?

Essentially the Twolves are counting on Russel choosing to sign here in a S&T. That’s their leverage.

[delux55]

Maybe this is obvious, but somebody reassure me that signing Russell to the max isn’t adding the Wiggins deal all over?

In Russell, I see a young guy that performed below his lottery pick expectations, produces offensive counting stats without great efficiency, doesn’t defend, and you hope that with his youth, he grows to be worth the max deal.

It's still risky no doubt because your're betting on continued improvement with a young player, but Wiggins he ain't. He's at least filling up the stat sheet and had a 19.4 PER last year and positive VORP of 3.3. Wiggins on the other hand sports a career high 16.4 PER and has never has a positive VORP.

I feel like when you're a team that is not a free agent destination (and let's not kid ourselves), you either have to tank and collect high draft picks, or take some risks on upside. With Towns and Roco in the fold, tanking doesn't seem to be an option. And I think when surveying the NBA landscape Russell is as good an upside play as there is right now.

This is probably the most valid point to be made about the pursuit of Russell IMO.

The two things that attract most free agents are a big market or the chance to win, historically we offer neither of each of those options. So when it comes to attracting top level talent our most realistic course of action is almost always going to be investing in a player who we feel has the ceiling to be a star rather than attracting an established one.

I understand the hesitancy around paying DLo the max, it's a risky move. But I honestly think it's a risk that we should be taking.

That was the same logic that maxed out Wiggins

[Calinks]

I'm getting pretty worried about what may have to give up to get Russell. I'm not comfortable moving Covington, Okogie, or maybe even Culver for him. I think we would have to give up some combination of big assets though.

[TheZachAttack]

It's still risky no doubt because your're betting on continued improvement with a young player, but Wiggins he ain't. He's at least filling up the stat sheet and had a 19.4 PER last year and positive VORP of 3.3. Wiggins on the other hand sports a career high 16.4 PER and has never has a positive VORP.

I feel like when you're a team that is not a free agent destination (and let's not kid ourselves), you either have to tank and collect high draft picks, or take some risks on upside. With Towns and Roco in the fold, tanking doesn't seem to be an option. And I think when surveying the NBA landscape Russell is as good an upside play as there is right now.

This is probably the most valid point to be made about the pursuit of Russell IMO.

The two things that attract most free agents are a big market or the chance to win, historically we offer neither of each of those options. So when it comes to attracting top level talent our most realistic course of action is almost always going to be investing in a player who we feel has the ceiling to be a star rather than attracting an established one.

I understand the hesitancy around paying DLo the max, it's a risky move. But I honestly think it's a risk that we should be taking.

That was the same logic that maxed out Wiggins

That does not mean that it was a bad decision. There was a scenario when Wiggins worked out. Wiggins not only did not improve he significantly regressed.

If Wiggins would not have regressed, it would have been an okay decision. If Wiggins would have continued to progress it would have been a good decision.

The Wiggins situation is a lesson, but it should not stop you from pursuing Russell and maxing him. The biggest reason for that is that Russell is already and shows the potential to be an elite shooting scoring guard and great passing ability. Wiggins was always fighting the modern NBA with his inability to shoot.

The logic to max Wiggins was not bad, especially coming off of the season that he came off of. The result was bad. There's a difference. Wiggins regressing does not mean D Lo will regress.

[D1SGRUNTL3D]

I'm getting pretty worried about what may have to give up to get Russell. I'm not comfortable moving Covington, Okogie, or maybe even Culver for him. I think we would have to give up some combination of big assets though.

Culvers off the table IMO because hes on a rookie deal. Okogie or covington+ 1st? sure.

Im higher on Culver than Okogie whos also on a rookie deal

[TheZachAttack]

I'm getting pretty worried about what may have to give up to get Russell. I'm not comfortable moving Covington, Okogie, or maybe even Culver for him. I think we would have to give up some combination of big assets though.

You really think so highly of Okogie that you would pass on Russell? Okogie is a nice rotation player, but come on. I guess that just shows how much trouble the Wolves have had developing even passable rotation players. The better NBA development teams develop an Okogie out of more drafts than not. Russell is an entirely different level.

The only scenario the Wolves get Russell is if Kyrie signs in Brooklyn. If he does, the Nets will rescind the rights to D Lo or will do a sign and trade. If that's the case, it's not as much about assets as it is cap space on both sides.

I think Okogie and/or a protected 1st will be enough to get rid of an expiring Teague. The Russell scenario is not really about assets, it's about signing scenarios and intent that create a path of dominos falling in a certain way.

If Kyrie signs with Brooklyn and D Lo wants to sign with the Wolves...he won't be that expensive to get here at all.

[King Malta]

This is probably the most valid point to be made about the pursuit of Russell IMO.

The two things that attract most free agents are a big market or the chance to win, historically we offer neither of each of those options. So when it comes to attracting top level talent our most realistic course of action is almost always going to be investing in a player who we feel has the ceiling to be a star rather than attracting an established one.

I understand the hesitancy around paying DLo the max, it's a risky move. But I honestly think it's a risk that we should be taking.

That was the same logic that maxed out Wiggins

That does not mean that it was a bad decision. There was a scenario when Wiggins worked out. Wiggins not only did not improve he significantly regressed.

If Wiggins would not have regressed, it would have been an okay decision. If Wiggins would have continued to progress it would have been a good decision.

The Wiggins situation is a lesson, but it should not stop you from pursuing Russell and maxing him. The biggest reason for that is that Russell is already and shows the potential to be an elite shooting scoring guard and great passing ability. Wiggins was always fighting the modern NBA with his inability to shoot.

The logic to max Wiggins was not bad, especially coming off of the season that he came off of. The result was bad. There's a difference. Wiggins regressing does not mean D Lo will regress.

Correct. You can't become totally risk averse because you've bombed out in the past. If we're never going to take a punt on potential again we might as well shut up shop and move the team to a larger market, because we're not going to be attracting Durant or AD types in FA.

Also. DLo's last season was better than anything Wiggin's has ever produced IMO.

[KGdaBom]

Meh, I still prefer to see Rubio. With all these talk about identity and challenging the norm, how about a lineup of Rubio-Culver-Okogie-Covington-Towns? Now that's a defensive identity! I know spacing is an issue there, but with all those athletes we could run them down every possession. If we can't shoot much in that lineup, the other team on the other hand won't be able to get a good shot also with all those good defenders stopping them.

Cant shoot and cant score.

Defensively, youd still have either Okogie or Culver undersized against most SF's. Fouling will be another problem. Kat likes to foul. Okogie likes to foul. Culver most likely gets the rookie treatment from the refs.

Unless Culver turns into Paul Pierce overnight, that line up will have problems.

Paul Pierce 2.0 would be just fine with me.

[KGdaBom]

I'm getting pretty worried about what may have to give up to get Russell. I'm not comfortable moving Covington, Okogie, or maybe even Culver for him. I think we would have to give up some combination of big assets though.

I'd be OK with letting Okogie go as much as I like him. Covington and Culver are close to untouchable.