The Tim Connelly Thread (prev./still Fire Him)

[Folklore]

Because they wanted KAT!

They wanted Kat so they went ahead and gave us a piece of sht with the cherry on top.

If TC thought Naz could replace Kat why would he bring in another player to take his minutes? same goes for NAW unless he planned on trading him this whole time.


Lets not forget he gave Rudy a Trade Bonus too after he signed his old teammates. TC is an idiot

1. What trade bonus, am I missing something?

2. The trade happened at an irregular time. Finding a 3rd team for Randle would be very difficult. Finch vouched for Randle and we decided to keep him till the deadline. But Naz is getting more and more run end of game, and is soon going to usurp Randle whether or not he is traded. Also the money was very tricky and probably required Randle or else a lot of random players and pieces resulting in a lot of dead money and weird fits for us.

3. Again, the trade was for DDV. We wouldn’t give them Karl unless they gave us DDV. DDV is a top value contract, and his improved play has had big benefits for us. His injury is devastating. The first from Detroit was also part of the value balancing. I expect that unlike RealGM where fans are biased, GMs will want to make there teams better and be willing to do so with Randle. The real question is the money given the 2nd apron, and the timing. Randle could move as part of a Lavine, BI, Beal, Jimmy, deal. It probably won’t happen until February and probably not until the 5th or 6th.

7.5% Trade kicker

[winforlose]

They wanted Kat so they went ahead and gave us a piece of sht with the cherry on top.

If TC thought Naz could replace Kat why would he bring in another player to take his minutes? same goes for NAW unless he planned on trading him this whole time.


Lets not forget he gave Rudy a Trade Bonus too after he signed his old teammates. TC is an idiot

1. What trade bonus, am I missing something?

2. The trade happened at an irregular time. Finding a 3rd team for Randle would be very difficult. Finch vouched for Randle and we decided to keep him till the deadline. But Naz is getting more and more run end of game, and is soon going to usurp Randle whether or not he is traded. Also the money was very tricky and probably required Randle or else a lot of random players and pieces resulting in a lot of dead money and weird fits for us.

3. Again, the trade was for DDV. We wouldn’t give them Karl unless they gave us DDV. DDV is a top value contract, and his improved play has had big benefits for us. His injury is devastating. The first from Detroit was also part of the value balancing. I expect that unlike RealGM where fans are biased, GMs will want to make there teams better and be willing to do so with Randle. The real question is the money given the 2nd apron, and the timing. Randle could move as part of a Lavine, BI, Beal, Jimmy, deal. It probably won’t happen until February and probably not until the 5th or 6th.

7.5% Trade kicker

I didn’t know. Either way I think that is fine. We needed Rudy to take as cheap a deal as possible, and we can pay it with non tax, non cap dollars. It also helps with the money outgoing in bringing back whoever we end up bringing back.

[Klomp]

I think the biggest fault of Connelly and Finch is the trying to thread the needle between staying competitive and building up your development pieces and other assets. It's a tough needle to thread, and there have probably been more "misses" than people expected.

Fans are thirsty for wins, especially after last year's WCF run. Fans are excited about the future of the young guys. But it's not always a direct line from Point A to Point B.

I think it is more complicated than that. We don’t own our picks basically for the next 7 years. 2028 is the only year we don’t owe a pick or swap. Tanking is not gonna be a realistic option for us, no matter who gets hurt or how glum things look. Add to that the fact that we are a 2nd apron team, and the second apron has pretty stiff penalties for being there multiple years in a 4 year span. We need this season to work. Finch and TC don’t seem to have that urgency. If they did Karl would have moved at the deadline instead of before camp.

I said this years ago, when we first acquired Gobert. With him on the team, the absolute floor of the team is .500. There is no tanking. As bad as it gets, he alone will keep the team around a .500 record at worst. I think that's what Connelly is banking on with trading picks. With Gobert on the team, the value lost via the picks themselves should be limited.

And while you can argue the logic behind the Towns trade, I do think the second apron penalties play a role in it. I think there were players they were targeting that they felt they could extract enough player value while gaining enough roster flexibility to maneuver around the second apron. I don't think a deadline deal would be any better. I think we'd actually see similar value, at best. Teams aren't usually as willing to make major trades during the season. You get as much value as you can get, but the real blockbusters happen in the offseason. And essentially, this trade happened in-season.

[winforlose]

I think the biggest fault of Connelly and Finch is the trying to thread the needle between staying competitive and building up your development pieces and other assets. It's a tough needle to thread, and there have probably been more "misses" than people expected.

Fans are thirsty for wins, especially after last year's WCF run. Fans are excited about the future of the young guys. But it's not always a direct line from Point A to Point B.

I think it is more complicated than that. We don’t own our picks basically for the next 7 years. 2028 is the only year we don’t owe a pick or swap. Tanking is not gonna be a realistic option for us, no matter who gets hurt or how glum things look. Add to that the fact that we are a 2nd apron team, and the second apron has pretty stiff penalties for being there multiple years in a 4 year span. We need this season to work. Finch and TC don’t seem to have that urgency. If they did Karl would have moved at the deadline instead of before camp.

I said this years ago, when we first acquired Gobert. With him on the team, the absolute floor of the team is .500. There is no tanking. As bad as it gets, he alone will keep the team around a .500 record at worst. I think that's what Connelly is banking on with trading picks. With Gobert on the team, the value lost via the picks themselves should be limited.

And while you can argue the logic behind the Towns trade, I do think the second apron penalties play a role in it. I think there were players they were targeting that they felt they could extract enough player value while gaining enough roster flexibility to maneuver around the second apron. I don't think a deadline deal would be any better. I think we'd actually see similar value, at best. Teams aren't usually as willing to make major trades during the season. You get as much value as you can get, but the real blockbusters happen in the offseason. And essentially, this trade happened in-season.

When a player of Karl’s talent is available in his prime with this much control deals can happen. If we got a good deal but not a great deal I would agree with you. This deal was not good or great, it was miserable. Worse still if we end up keeping Randle it saved very little money. We had to cut KBD which dead moneyed some of the savings. Overall maybe ownership pays 10 million less but loses a ton of revenue on being flexed out of prime time for games, decreased ticket value, decreased merch sales, fewer playoff games, ect… A deal this bad should not have happened and could definitely have been found at mid season.

[Klomp]

When a player of Karl’s talent is available in his prime with this much control deals can happen. If we got a good deal but not a great deal I would agree with you. This deal was not good or great, it was miserable. Worse still if we end up keeping Randle it saved very little money. We had to cut KBD which dead moneyed some of the savings. Overall maybe ownership pays 10 million less but loses a ton of revenue on being flexed out of prime time for games, decreased ticket value, decreased merch sales, fewer playoff games, ect… A deal this bad should not have happened and could definitely have been found at mid season.

Point A: Worse still if we end up keeping Randle it saved very little money.
When you have a static number of roster spots, you save money by paying two players $40 million and $10 million, respectively, compared to paying one player $50 million. Moreover, I put it at less than a 5% chance that a future Randle contract here would be upwards of $40 million. I put my extreme max prediction at $35, but I wput the most likely new number at $25-30 if he is here past this season.

Point B: We had to cut KBD which dead moneyed some of the savings.
This season, sure. The dead money will be gone after the season though. The flexibility is about summer 2025.

Point C: Overall maybe ownership pays 10 million less but loses a ton of revenue on being flexed out of prime time for games, decreased ticket value, decreased merch sales, fewer playoff games, ect…
This is a fair point and one of the stronger money arguments against the trade I've seen since September. Still though, everyone talks about how we need to build around Ant while he is on his max contract or he's going to bolt for a bigger market. The front office made a trade to ensure that flexibility to keep building around him will still be feasible going forward.

I think it boils down to the belief that all of the eggs in the basket needed to be on 2024-25 versus stretching it out where we have a continued chance to make a similar run over the next 5 years.

[winforlose]

When a player of Karl’s talent is available in his prime with this much control deals can happen. If we got a good deal but not a great deal I would agree with you. This deal was not good or great, it was miserable. Worse still if we end up keeping Randle it saved very little money. We had to cut KBD which dead moneyed some of the savings. Overall maybe ownership pays 10 million less but loses a ton of revenue on being flexed out of prime time for games, decreased ticket value, decreased merch sales, fewer playoff games, ect… A deal this bad should not have happened and could definitely have been found at mid season.

Point A: Worse still if we end up keeping Randle it saved very little money.
When you have a static number of roster spots, you save money by paying two players $40 million and $10 million, respectively, compared to paying one player $50 million. Moreover, I put it at less than a 5% chance that a future Randle contract here would be upwards of $40 million. I put my extreme max prediction at $35, but I wput the most likely new number at $25-30 if he is here past this season.

Point B: We had to cut KBD which dead moneyed some of the savings.
This season, sure. The dead money will be gone after the season though. The flexibility is about summer 2025.

Point C: Overall maybe ownership pays 10 million less but loses a ton of revenue on being flexed out of prime time for games, decreased ticket value, decreased merch sales, fewer playoff games, ect…
This is a fair point and one of the stronger money arguments against the trade I've seen since September. Still though, everyone talks about how we need to build around Ant while he is on his max contract or he's going to bolt for a bigger market. The front office made a trade to ensure that flexibility to keep building around him will still be feasible going forward.

I think it boils down to the belief that all of the eggs in the basket needed to be on 2024-25 versus stretching it out where we have a continued chance to make a similar run over the next 5 years.

The problem I have with your Summer 2025 argument is the timing of the KAT trade in fall 2024. It could have happened next off season with fewer issues. The timing was terrible for Finch who had game-planned all off season assuming Karl was here and Randle and DDV were not. The trade hurts team chemistry and forced an adjustment period a full year before it was necessary. None of this makes sense from the flexibility standpoint unless the true motivation of the trade was DDV. TC very clearly wanted DDV and was willing to make an unusual and complicated move to make it happen. I can live with that kind of mistake (though I hate it,) but I really detest trying to make it all about money. If it was just about money we could have found someone to give us picks, or we could have taken a different NYK package. KAT got moved for DDV and the rest was details to be figured out later.

[Klomp]

When a player of Karl’s talent is available in his prime with this much control deals can happen. If we got a good deal but not a great deal I would agree with you. This deal was not good or great, it was miserable. Worse still if we end up keeping Randle it saved very little money. We had to cut KBD which dead moneyed some of the savings. Overall maybe ownership pays 10 million less but loses a ton of revenue on being flexed out of prime time for games, decreased ticket value, decreased merch sales, fewer playoff games, ect… A deal this bad should not have happened and could definitely have been found at mid season.

Point A: Worse still if we end up keeping Randle it saved very little money.
When you have a static number of roster spots, you save money by paying two players $40 million and $10 million, respectively, compared to paying one player $50 million. Moreover, I put it at less than a 5% chance that a future Randle contract here would be upwards of $40 million. I put my extreme max prediction at $35, but I wput the most likely new number at $25-30 if he is here past this season.

Point B: We had to cut KBD which dead moneyed some of the savings.
This season, sure. The dead money will be gone after the season though. The flexibility is about summer 2025.

Point C: Overall maybe ownership pays 10 million less but loses a ton of revenue on being flexed out of prime time for games, decreased ticket value, decreased merch sales, fewer playoff games, ect…
This is a fair point and one of the stronger money arguments against the trade I've seen since September. Still though, everyone talks about how we need to build around Ant while he is on his max contract or he's going to bolt for a bigger market. The front office made a trade to ensure that flexibility to keep building around him will still be feasible going forward.

I think it boils down to the belief that all of the eggs in the basket needed to be on 2024-25 versus stretching it out where we have a continued chance to make a similar run over the next 5 years.

The problem I have with your Summer 2025 argument is the timing of the KAT trade in fall 2024. It could have happened next off season with fewer issues. The timing was terrible for Finch who had game-planned all off season assuming Karl was here and Randle and DDV were not. The trade hurts team chemistry and forced an adjustment period a full year before it was necessary. None of this makes sense from the flexibility standpoint unless the true motivation of the trade was DDV. TC very clearly wanted DDV and was willing to make an unusual and complicated move to make it happen. I can live with that kind of mistake (though I hate it,) but I really detest trying to make it all about money. If it was just about money we could have found someone to give us picks, or we could have taken a different NYK package. KAT got moved for DDV and the rest was details to be figured out later.

If you have in the back of your mind "in order to trade Player X, I need a return of this..." and they offer it but not when you wanted it, are you really going to risk the chance that it will be offered again at a later time?

[winforlose]

Point A: Worse still if we end up keeping Randle it saved very little money.
When you have a static number of roster spots, you save money by paying two players $40 million and $10 million, respectively, compared to paying one player $50 million. Moreover, I put it at less than a 5% chance that a future Randle contract here would be upwards of $40 million. I put my extreme max prediction at $35, but I wput the most likely new number at $25-30 if he is here past this season.

Point B: We had to cut KBD which dead moneyed some of the savings.
This season, sure. The dead money will be gone after the season though. The flexibility is about summer 2025.

Point C: Overall maybe ownership pays 10 million less but loses a ton of revenue on being flexed out of prime time for games, decreased ticket value, decreased merch sales, fewer playoff games, ect…
This is a fair point and one of the stronger money arguments against the trade I've seen since September. Still though, everyone talks about how we need to build around Ant while he is on his max contract or he's going to bolt for a bigger market. The front office made a trade to ensure that flexibility to keep building around him will still be feasible going forward.

I think it boils down to the belief that all of the eggs in the basket needed to be on 2024-25 versus stretching it out where we have a continued chance to make a similar run over the next 5 years.

The problem I have with your Summer 2025 argument is the timing of the KAT trade in fall 2024. It could have happened next off season with fewer issues. The timing was terrible for Finch who had game-planned all off season assuming Karl was here and Randle and DDV were not. The trade hurts team chemistry and forced an adjustment period a full year before it was necessary. None of this makes sense from the flexibility standpoint unless the true motivation of the trade was DDV. TC very clearly wanted DDV and was willing to make an unusual and complicated move to make it happen. I can live with that kind of mistake (though I hate it,) but I really detest trying to make it all about money. If it was just about money we could have found someone to give us picks, or we could have taken a different NYK package. KAT got moved for DDV and the rest was details to be figured out later.

If you have in the back of your mind "in order to trade Player X, I need a return of this..." and they offer it but not when you wanted it, are you really going to risk the chance that it will be offered again at a later time?

Again, the question is whether this was about DDV or the money. If DDV was the desired return then yes it makes sense he pulled the trigger when DDV was made available. If it was just about money this is much less likely. We could have dumped KAT elsewhere in the Butler scrum, or found opportunities to move him next off season. My point is that TC made a choice to trade Karl for DDV and get whatever else he could to balance the value difference (Det First plus whatever we can move Randle for.) The argument that TC did it to make room for NAW and Naz would be more convincing if they were coming up for extensions. But NAW is not extension eligible and Naz is a player option. In both cases the deals will happen next offseason. People blaming saving money or ownership for the trade ignore the fact that TC wanted DDV and when DDV was made available he pulled the trigger long before he had to.

[shrink]

The problem I have with your Summer 2025 argument is the timing of the KAT trade in fall 2024. It could have happened next off season with fewer issues.

Randle could have been off NYK’s books, so matching Towns $53 mil salary would likely be impossible. I don’t know if other teams were interested, but the news we got at the trade was that Rosas and NYK was the most interested. And of course, I think another Towns injury this year could have made it impossible to trade KAT, considering his injury history the last four years.

I agree that was a tough time to make a trade, right before the season.

[Klomp]

The problem I have with your Summer 2025 argument is the timing of the KAT trade in fall 2024. It could have happened next off season with fewer issues. The timing was terrible for Finch who had game-planned all off season assuming Karl was here and Randle and DDV were not. The trade hurts team chemistry and forced an adjustment period a full year before it was necessary. None of this makes sense from the flexibility standpoint unless the true motivation of the trade was DDV. TC very clearly wanted DDV and was willing to make an unusual and complicated move to make it happen. I can live with that kind of mistake (though I hate it,) but I really detest trying to make it all about money. If it was just about money we could have found someone to give us picks, or we could have taken a different NYK package. KAT got moved for DDV and the rest was details to be figured out later.

If you have in the back of your mind "in order to trade Player X, I need a return of this..." and they offer it but not when you wanted it, are you really going to risk the chance that it will be offered again at a later time?

Again, the question is whether this was about DDV or the money. If DDV was the desired return then yes it makes sense he pulled the trigger when DDV was made available. If it was just about money this is much less likely. We could have dumped KAT elsewhere in the Butler scrum, or found opportunities to move him next off season. My point is that TC made a choice to trade Karl for DDV and get whatever else he could to balance the value difference (Det First plus whatever we can move Randle for.) The argument that TC did it to make room for NAW and Naz would be more convincing if they were coming up for extensions. But NAW is not extension eligible and Naz is a player option. In both cases the deals will happen next offseason. People blaming saving money or ownership for the trade ignore the fact that TC wanted DDV and when DDV was made available he pulled the trigger long before he had to.

I think it's about all of the above. The trade offered a very positive contract and improved cap maneuverability.

I don't think it's specifically about Donte. I bet Connelly had a running list of names that if they were to trade Towns, these are names who would be non-negotiables from the respective teams. In order for a trade to happen, it has to _____. I think Donte was on that list. That doesn't mean it was a done deal, but that's what made them listen to the offer at first after turning away discussions that were based around Julius and Mitch.

Thinking too about the Gobert trade...I think a non-negotiable was putting Jaden in the trade. It sounded like offers had been turned down for a while because they all included Jaden. Or thinking back to 2007....Boston's non-negotiable was including Rajon Rondo in any deal.

From there, negotiations are about who blinks first. Who is willing to give up their non-negotiable first? That is how major trades happen.

[shrink]

For those that think Connelly just dumped Towns to get off the salary, I think it’s important to remember the facts.

1. NYK had been trying to trade for Towns for over a year, and Connelly shot those trades down. All would dump salary.

2. Connelly planned to keep Towns on draft day. He drafted guard offense, and didn’t draft a back up center.

3. Connelly planned to keep Towns during free agency - again not signing a back up center (I consider Garza a big wing).

4. Connelly reportedly didn’t even listen to NYK offers until they stopped sending variations with Randle and Mitchell Robinson, and switched to Randle and DiVincenzo.

5. Even when he got NYK ato break up the “Nova Knicks,” he STILL said no, and NYK was forced to up their offer with the DET 1st.

All these offers features Randle, so they all get back a certain amount of payroll relief to keep Naz. But Connelly didn’t budge until he got both DDV and the 1st in the deal. DiVincenzo was a key piece, that Connelly felt added enough value to the package to accept.

[bluethunder0005]

The issue is Donte is a role player, he can be an important role player, but at the end of the day he's not a big needle mover on his own. We traded a player that would be considered a star for lackluster value. I get that the salary is why we ultimately moved from KAT, but moving him for what we did doesn't leave us much options for getting talent back, especially with the teams limited draft picks remaining.

Jaden hasn't progressed like we needed him too and honestly he makes about double what he should. Even if Randle were to opt-out we'd still be over the cap next year. We don't have much tempting youth to try and package with Conley to try and get another star and no team will be willing to trade for Jaden with him making as much as he is for the next few years.

I just don't see a lot of options for this team to drastically improve over the next couple years which makes it a giant let down after last years success. Not to be a downer, but the team is 1 game up from falling out of the play-ins and we're past the time in the season where things will just fix themselves. If Randle isn't moved by the trade deadline, I'm not sure we make the play-ins, let alone make it to the playoffs.

[TimberKat]

For those that think Connelly just dumped Towns to get off the salary, I think it’s important to remember the facts.

1. NYK had been trying to trade for Towns for over a year, and Connelly shot those trades down. All would dump salary.

2. Connelly planned to keep Towns on draft day. He drafted guard offense, and didn’t draft a back up center.

3. Connelly planned to keep Towns during free agency - again not signing a back up center (I consider Garza a big wing).

4. Connelly reportedly didn’t even listen to NYK offers until they stopped sending variations with Randle and Mitchell Robinson, and switched to Randle and DiVincenzo.

5. Even when he got NYK ato break up the “Nova Knicks,” he STILL said no, and NYK was forced to up their offer with the DET 1st.

All these offers features Randle, so they all get back a certain amount of payroll relief to keep Naz. But Connelly didn’t budge until he got both DDV and the 1st in the deal. DiVincenzo was a key piece, that Connelly felt added enough value to the package to accept.

Big, big mistake so far.

[Klomp]

I think one other consideration for the trade is that it reset the balance of the depth chart. It is far easier to build a roster in today's NBA around a great backcourt than it is to build around a big man. The trade seemed to spread the wealth out a bit more in term of usage within the regular rotation.

Last year, it was basically either Edwards (32.3%) or Towns (27.4%). Reid (23.1%) was the Towns "replacement" during the extended absence and you have to fall all the way to Conley (16.0%) and McDaniels (15.7%) to find a main rotation player. Falling in line after that were Gobert (15.4%), Alexander-Walker (14.8%) and Anderson (14.5%).

This year, you still run through the SG and PF, but the usage isn't as high for either Edwards (30.7%) or Randle (25.4%). Dillingham (23.4%) and DiVincenzo (19.3%) pick up a chunk of that, while Reid (21.8%) has dropped a bit. Alexander-Walker (16.2%) and Conley (15.4%) have flip-flopped but are close to where they were, while McDaniels (14.8%) and Gobert (11.9%) are seeing less usage.

This could be another reason for the slow start, as players are adjusting to newer roles within the offense.

[TimberKat]

If Clark, Shannon, and Dilly turns into rotation player and if just one of them turns into borderline all-star, that would make TC a very good GM. Looks like he has a good chance to get there.

[winforlose]

If Clark, Shannon, and Dilly turns into rotation player and if just one of them turns into borderline all-star, that would make TC a very good GM. Looks like he has a good chance to get there.

Clark or Shannon maybe, Dilly cost so much he has to be PGOF and starter quality just to make TC not look awful. If Dilly is a career backup then TC made the worst Wolves trade since we gave up Cam Johnson and Saric for Culver.

Both Clark and Shannon were depressed picks that should have gone higher. Clark was his injury, Shannon the rape allegation. Honestly it is Miller and Minott who would be the better testament to TC as a draft judge. Those picks were less obvious and would be the bigger suprise.

[Klomp]

Connelly got a ton of heat for moves like the Ingles one. But today, I'm reminded about how important team culture is. Ingles came in, likely expecting to be a rotation player in the Anderson role. Then the trade happened. Not once has Ingles put up a stink, when he easily could have pouted like guys like Nowell, Minott, etc have in the past. He's been a model veteran for this young group. At worst, I would call that a neutral signing.

[TimberKat]

Connelly got a ton of heat for moves like the Ingles one. But today, I'm reminded about how important team culture is. Ingles came in, likely expecting to be a rotation player in the Anderson role. Then the trade happened. Not once has Ingles put up a stink, when he easily could have pouted like guys like Nowell, Minott, etc have in the past. He's been a model veteran for this young group. At worst, I would call that a neutral signing.

Ingles haven't play much last year either so I am not sure we should give credit to Connelly. Ingles is lucky to get an NBA contract this year. If Ingles is that important in culture, you can bring him in as a coach.

[Klomp]

If Ingles is that important in culture, you can bring him in as a coach.

Not really. Coaches are not able to set and enforce the culture like the players do.

[minimus]

If Ingles is that important in culture, you can bring him in as a coach.

Not really. Coaches are not able to set and enforce the culture like the players do.

Well, as we know not every player is built to be a coach. Also I think coaches go it in a different way than players. I can use an example from IT. There is a lead engineer: hands-on, experienced, skillful. And there is a manager who communicate with owners of process, team and organize process. A good team should be a place where both roles are filled with great personalities and professionals. Both roles should be used to build a productive, yet toxic free culture. MIA culture has been great because of their scouting, player development, athletic programs that work hand in hand with great coaching. But management has let them down, and it directly affects them.