2024 Free Agency

[Note30]

Hindsight sure. Wouldn't it be great if we could do every draft with hindsight. Without hindsight this trade was just a wing and a prayer for the Spurs. Everybody knows we took them to cleaners. Spurs fans are calling their GM Brian Wrong. This Devil's advocate stuff is ridiculous.

I hated the Webster and Budinger trades with an absolute passion right from the start.
I didn't like the value in the Gobert trade, but I think we have a much much much better GM at the helm now and I trust him a helluva lot more than if one of the previous POBOs had traded an unprotected pick 7 years out.

What sucks for Spurs fans is that they might have to wait a very long time to see if it was a good trade.
But I guarantee you if they add a Star player to go with Victor using our picks, those same fans will change their tune pretty fast.

Yep If IF IF. A lot of the fans will be dead by the time the pick swap conveys (and the GM will almost certainly be gone) if it does and they get the pick. Delayed gratification is one thing, but delaying gratification 6 or 7 years is something the vast majority of people and NBA teams don't want to do.

What? It's seven years from now not 70. Seven years ago was the Jimmy Butler era for us.

As for the pick not being valued enough, Jayson Tatum was one of the picks conveyed 5 years after the 2012 trade for Pierce and KG. The other was Brown the year before.

It was a win now move for the Nets then. That didn't work out so great for them.

If Rob busts, then we've given up a potential top 10 pick in a stronger draft.

No one on the current roster is guaranteed or even signed for the next 7 years. It's a complete unknown.

Moves could be made to alleviate things, but this was a weak draft class.

[Neeva]

I hated the Webster and Budinger trades with an absolute passion right from the start.
I didn't like the value in the Gobert trade, but I think we have a much much much better GM at the helm now and I trust him a helluva lot more than if one of the previous POBOs had traded an unprotected pick 7 years out.

What sucks for Spurs fans is that they might have to wait a very long time to see if it was a good trade.
But I guarantee you if they add a Star player to go with Victor using our picks, those same fans will change their tune pretty fast.

Yep If IF IF. A lot of the fans will be dead by the time the pick swap conveys (and the GM will almost certainly be gone) if it does and they get the pick. Delayed gratification is one thing, but delaying gratification 6 or 7 years is something the vast majority of people and NBA teams don't want to do.

What? It's seven years from now not 70. Seven years ago was the Jimmy Butler era for us.

As for the pick not being valued enough, Jayson Tatum was one of the picks conveyed 5 years after the 2012 trade for Pierce and KG. The other was Brown the year before.

It was a win now move for the Nets then. That didn't work out so great for them.

If Rob busts, then we've given up a potential top 10 pick in a stronger draft.

No one on the current roster is guaranteed or even signed for the next 7 years. It's a complete unknown.

Moves could be made to alleviate things, but this was a weak draft class.

You have been wrong about nearly every Connelley move as gm and I won’t be surprised if your streak continues.

[Klomp]

It's interesting, because once you realize the Spurs got the No. 8 by trading Jakob Poeltl, the 2031 unprotected doesn't seem like such bad value.

[Note30]

Yep If IF IF. A lot of the fans will be dead by the time the pick swap conveys (and the GM will almost certainly be gone) if it does and they get the pick. Delayed gratification is one thing, but delaying gratification 6 or 7 years is something the vast majority of people and NBA teams don't want to do.

What? It's seven years from now not 70. Seven years ago was the Jimmy Butler era for us.

As for the pick not being valued enough, Jayson Tatum was one of the picks conveyed 5 years after the 2012 trade for Pierce and KG. The other was Brown the year before.

It was a win now move for the Nets then. That didn't work out so great for them.

If Rob busts, then we've given up a potential top 10 pick in a stronger draft.

No one on the current roster is guaranteed or even signed for the next 7 years. It's a complete unknown.

Moves could be made to alleviate things, but this was a weak draft class.

You have been wrong about nearly every Connelley move as gm and I won’t be surprised if your streak continues.

Which time?

Haven't been wrong once.

Stop the name-calling and personal attacks.

[Neeva]

It's interesting, because once you realize the Spurs got the No. 8 by trading Jakob Poeltl, the 2031 unprotected doesn't seem like such bad value.

Wolves can just trade their 2038 unprotected first round pick for a top ten pick in that 2031 draft and keep doing that to infinity . I mean what good is the money in the safe for seven years , if you need it, we want the title NOW.

[Neeva]

What? It's seven years from now not 70. Seven years ago was the Jimmy Butler era for us.

As for the pick not being valued enough, Jayson Tatum was one of the picks conveyed 5 years after the 2012 trade for Pierce and KG. The other was Brown the year before.

It was a win now move for the Nets then. That didn't work out so great for them.

If Rob busts, then we've given up a potential top 10 pick in a stronger draft.

No one on the current roster is guaranteed or even signed for the next 7 years. It's a complete unknown.

Moves could be made to alleviate things, but this was a weak draft class.

You have been wrong about nearly every Connelley move as gm and I won’t be surprised if your streak continues.

Which time **** face?

Haven't been wrong once.

It’s too embarrassing for you to bring up your Kessler>Rudy posts.

[Note30]

You have been wrong about nearly every Connelley move as gm and I won’t be surprised if your streak continues.

Which time **** face?

Haven't been wrong once.

It’s too embarrassing for you to bring up your Kessler>Rudy posts.

Go for it. I'll wait.

Show me exactly what I said and prove me wrong.

[Mattya]

The comparison to the nets makes no sense. Joe Johnson was 31 years old and the team traded for a clearly diminished Kevin Garnett and Paul Pierce.

I hated the Webster and Budinger trades with an absolute passion right from the start.
I didn't like the value in the Gobert trade, but I think we have a much much much better GM at the helm now and I trust him a helluva lot more than if one of the previous POBOs had traded an unprotected pick 7 years out.

What sucks for Spurs fans is that they might have to wait a very long time to see if it was a good trade.
But I guarantee you if they add a Star player to go with Victor using our picks, those same fans will change their tune pretty fast.

Yep If IF IF. A lot of the fans will be dead by the time the pick swap conveys (and the GM will almost certainly be gone) if it does and they get the pick. Delayed gratification is one thing, but delaying gratification 6 or 7 years is something the vast majority of people and NBA teams don't want to do.

What? It's seven years from now not 70. Seven years ago was the Jimmy Butler era for us.

As for the pick not being valued enough, Jayson Tatum was one of the picks conveyed 5 years after the 2012 trade for Pierce and KG. The other was Brown the year before.

It was a win now move for the Nets then. That didn't work out so great for them.

If Rob busts, then we've given up a potential top 10 pick in a stronger draft.

No one on the current roster is guaranteed or even signed for the next 7 years. It's a complete unknown.

Moves could be made to alleviate things, but this was a weak draft class.

Or you have given up potentially a worse pick in a worse draft

[Note30]

The comparison to the nets makes no sense. Joe Johnson was 31 years old and the team traded for a clearly diminished Kevin Garnett and Paul Pierce.

Yep If IF IF. A lot of the fans will be dead by the time the pick swap conveys (and the GM will almost certainly be gone) if it does and they get the pick. Delayed gratification is one thing, but delaying gratification 6 or 7 years is something the vast majority of people and NBA teams don't want to do.

What? It's seven years from now not 70. Seven years ago was the Jimmy Butler era for us.

As for the pick not being valued enough, Jayson Tatum was one of the picks conveyed 5 years after the 2012 trade for Pierce and KG. The other was Brown the year before.

It was a win now move for the Nets then. That didn't work out so great for them.

If Rob busts, then we've given up a potential top 10 pick in a stronger draft.

No one on the current roster is guaranteed or even signed for the next 7 years. It's a complete unknown.

Moves could be made to alleviate things, but this was a weak draft class.

Or you have given up potentially a worse pick in a worse draft

The point is more so a trade made with no clear idea of what the team will be like in that era for a draft pick who hasnt played in the league is risky.

[Klomp]

A day later, Spurs general manager Brian Wright acknowledged the obvious: The Spurs made the swap because they believed the assets Minnesota was offering — an unprotected first-round pick in 2031 and a pick swap opportunity in 2030 — were good value for a pick he had no intention of using this year.
---
The trade with Minnesota netted the Spurs roughly an extra $7 million in salary cap space to use this summer, up to $26 million.
The extra pick gave the Spurs 11 first-rounders between now and 2031 to bundle in a future trade.
The idea of not paying to develop a second first-rounder this season, on a roster that already ranks among the NBA's youngest, was also part of the calculus.
"I think you weigh that with the roster impact of another young player in that spot and the developmental player," Wright said. "But I think outside of that it was also just the value for what we thought the eighth pick was, fair value and what we were getting in return."

https://www.expressnews.com/sports/spurs/article/nba-draft-trade-dillingham-second-round-19544013.php

[KGdaBom]

It's interesting, because once you realize the Spurs got the No. 8 by trading Jakob Poeltl, the 2031 unprotected doesn't seem like such bad value.

Wolves can just trade their 2038 unprotected first round pick for a top ten pick in that 2031 draft and keep doing that to infinity . I mean what good is the money in the safe for seven years , if you need it, we want the title NOW.

Thank you. If an unprotected 1st 7 years from now is worth #8 in this years draft I would do that every year we are allowed to do it. I know it's not 100% scientific, but check YouTube for reactions to this trade. The vast majority of them considered this trade the Spurs giving the Wolves a gift. I am in shock how people on our board can think the Spurs broke even or possibly won the trade. 6 years from now they get a random pick swap. 7 years from now they get a random first.

[cmoss84]

Paul Reed anyone?

[Mattya]

The comparison to the nets makes no sense. Joe Johnson was 31 years old and the team traded for a clearly diminished Kevin Garnett and Paul Pierce.

What? It's seven years from now not 70. Seven years ago was the Jimmy Butler era for us.

As for the pick not being valued enough, Jayson Tatum was one of the picks conveyed 5 years after the 2012 trade for Pierce and KG. The other was Brown the year before.

It was a win now move for the Nets then. That didn't work out so great for them.

If Rob busts, then we've given up a potential top 10 pick in a stronger draft.

No one on the current roster is guaranteed or even signed for the next 7 years. It's a complete unknown.

Moves could be made to alleviate things, but this was a weak draft class.

Or you have given up potentially a worse pick in a worse draft

The point is more so a trade made with no clear idea of what the team will be like in that era for a draft pick who hasnt played in the league is risky.

That 2031 pick also hasn’t played in the league yet. There is always risk. How often can a team currently picking in the 20s trade a future pick for a top 10 pick? While that team has one of what the 2 best players under 25? If Dillingham is good, not even great, that is better results in the draft than what we have experienced over the past 30 years.

[KGdaBom]

Paul Reed anyone?

I wouldn't hate it, but he was supposed to have this big breakout when Embiid was out, but it didn't happen.

[Note30]

The comparison to the nets makes no sense. Joe Johnson was 31 years old and the team traded for a clearly diminished Kevin Garnett and Paul Pierce.

Or you have given up potentially a worse pick in a worse draft

The point is more so a trade made with no clear idea of what the team will be like in that era for a draft pick who hasnt played in the league is risky.

That 2031 pick also hasn’t played in the league yet. There is always risk. How often can a team currently picking in the 20s trade a future pick for a top 10 pick? While that team has one of what the 2 best players under 25? If Dillingham is good, not even great, that is better results in the draft than what we have experienced over the past 30 years.

It's a weak draft class, that's why the team can trade a future pick for a top 10 pick. Typically teams avoid doing this in weak draft classes.

The PG market is weak and filled with older players (most of whom are unattainable and don't fit out team). I get why TC did it.

It makes sense.

That's not even what I'm arguing. I'm arguing it's risky.

I'm arguing the only reason we're doing this is because we've exhausted resources and out ourselves on this timeline where we need to win.

[Mattya]

The point is more so a trade made with no clear idea of what the team will be like in that era for a draft pick who hasnt played in the league is risky.

That 2031 pick also hasn’t played in the league yet. There is always risk. How often can a team currently picking in the 20s trade a future pick for a top 10 pick? While that team has one of what the 2 best players under 25? If Dillingham is good, not even great, that is better results in the draft than what we have experienced over the past 30 years.

It's a weak draft class, that's why the team can trade a future pick for a top 10 pick. Typically teams avoid doing this in weak draft classes.

The PG market is weak and filled with older players (most of whom are unattainable and don't fit out team). I get why TC did it.

It makes sense.

That's not even what I'm arguing. I'm arguing it's risky.

I'm arguing the only reason we're doing this is because we've exhausted resources and out ourselves on this timeline where we need to win.

But your argument for why it’s risky ignores the risk of not making the move. You keep the pick, dillingham become good. The Wolves stay good, diminishing the future value of the pick, making it worth less.

[Note30]

That 2031 pick also hasn’t played in the league yet. There is always risk. How often can a team currently picking in the 20s trade a future pick for a top 10 pick? While that team has one of what the 2 best players under 25? If Dillingham is good, not even great, that is better results in the draft than what we have experienced over the past 30 years.

It's a weak draft class, that's why the team can trade a future pick for a top 10 pick. Typically teams avoid doing this in weak draft classes.

The PG market is weak and filled with older players (most of whom are unattainable and don't fit out team). I get why TC did it.

It makes sense.

That's not even what I'm arguing. I'm arguing it's risky.

I'm arguing the only reason we're doing this is because we've exhausted resources and out ourselves on this timeline where we need to win.

But your argument for why it’s risky ignores the risk of not making the move. You keep the pick, dillingham become good. The Wolves stay good, diminishing the future value of the pick, making it worth less.

You're right.

It's double edged. If it works out home run. If it doesn't well its a ticking timebomb.

I just don't like that it's something we have no sight into. I don't like that TC felt like he had to make that move because we're in this right and weird spot with lack of talent.

There's less agency in the decision and it felt like as you put it a risk to not make the move.

[KGdaBom]

It's a weak draft class, that's why the team can trade a future pick for a top 10 pick. Typically teams avoid doing this in weak draft classes.

The PG market is weak and filled with older players (most of whom are unattainable and don't fit out team). I get why TC did it.

It makes sense.

That's not even what I'm arguing. I'm arguing it's risky.

I'm arguing the only reason we're doing this is because we've exhausted resources and out ourselves on this timeline where we need to win.

But your argument for why it’s risky ignores the risk of not making the move. You keep the pick, dillingham become good. The Wolves stay good, diminishing the future value of the pick, making it worth less.

You're right.

It's double edged. If it works out home run. If it doesn't well its a ticking timebomb.

I just don't like that it's something we have no sight into. I don't like that TC felt like he had to make that move because we're in this right and weird spot with lack of talent.

There's less agency in the decision and it felt like as you put it a risk to not make the move.

If Dilly plays up to Connelly's hopes it could easily mean multiple NBA titles. If he doesn't it didn't hurt our chances until possibly 2030. I really don't give a rat's ass about 2030 now.

[Note30]

But your argument for why it’s risky ignores the risk of not making the move. You keep the pick, dillingham become good. The Wolves stay good, diminishing the future value of the pick, making it worth less.

You're right.

It's double edged. If it works out home run. If it doesn't well its a ticking timebomb.

I just don't like that it's something we have no sight into. I don't like that TC felt like he had to make that move because we're in this right and weird spot with lack of talent.

There's less agency in the decision and it felt like as you put it a risk to not make the move.

If Dilly plays up to Connelly's hopes it could easily mean multiple NBA titles. If he doesn't it didn't hurt our chances until possibly 2030.

Unless there's a better opportunity we could have used that pick in before then to win a title.

[KGdaBom]

You're right.

It's double edged. If it works out home run. If it doesn't well its a ticking timebomb.

I just don't like that it's something we have no sight into. I don't like that TC felt like he had to make that move because we're in this right and weird spot with lack of talent.

There's less agency in the decision and it felt like as you put it a risk to not make the move.

If Dilly plays up to Connelly's hopes it could easily mean multiple NBA titles. If he doesn't it didn't hurt our chances until possibly 2030.

Unless there's a better opportunity we could have used that pick in before then to win a title.

I've heard something about we had to use it or we'd lose the opportunity to use it. Regardless this is what Connelly chose to use the asset on. You're kind of doing what W4L is doing. Imagining a doom and gloom scenario that we have to prevent. If we didn't do this we were totally screwed at PG for a very long time. Dilly isn't a sure thing of course, but he gives us a good chance. I recommend having a little faith. IMO it's better than worrying about things that may never happen.