ImageImageImage

Beasley Re-Sign for 4 years / $60M

Moderators: Domejandro, Calinks, Worm Guts

Baseline81
Senior
Posts: 625
And1: 250
Joined: Jan 18, 2009

Re: Beasley Re-Sign for 4 years / $60M 

Post#201 » by Baseline81 » Sat Nov 21, 2020 6:45 pm

shrink wrote:For the record, it’s not just me. I have heard this brought up in all three of the three national podcasts I have listened to over the last week. In fact, one host called MIN the club that most bases it’s moves on emotions, and not facts, and this has been true since the Country Club days.

Look, I’m not trying to just troll here, and it’s fine if people disagree with my opinions. I just think they are worth discussing, because others outside of our organization - people that don’t hold a fandom towards individual players - are seeing a pattern here.

I want the Wolves to do well too, just like everyone here, but I am very concerned.

Besides Givony, who else mentioned this about Russell not wanting the Wolves to draft Ball? Note Ball was considered the pick by ESPN/Draft Express until the day or night prior to the draft. I thought the rumor was there much earlier.
shrink
RealGM
Posts: 45,238
And1: 5,867
Joined: Sep 26, 2005

Re: Beasley Re-Sign for 4 years / $60M 

Post#202 » by shrink » Sat Nov 21, 2020 6:47 pm

Baseline81 wrote:
shrink wrote:But even if you think it was close, the pick should have been Wiseman, because I think he appealed the most to GSW, and even if that failed, he appealed to CHA. This was lost leverage.

And if Wiseman was the selection but neither Golden State nor Charlotte were willing to meet Minnesota's demands, what then? The team would be stuck with a player who may be nothing more than a $10M back-up center to Towns. Or are you suggesting the Wolves should have taken the best offer no matter how little?

I think the risk that both GSW and CHA would pass on Wiseman is very low. There was a rumor two weeks ago that GSW had already offered their own lottery-protected 2021 1st, and Rosas said no. But even if the offer was small, it was better than zero, and it also would have put our pick on the cheaper rookie scale for the #2 or #3 pick.

Lastly, I am not sure that Wiseman won’t turn out to be the best player in this draft - especially after we added Rubio. Look at Ayton’s growth.

So from my perspective, there wasn’t a lot of risk to get something, and we got zero.
KGdaBom
RealGM
Posts: 11,652
And1: 2,389
Joined: Jun 22, 2017
         

Re: Beasley Re-Sign for 4 years / $60M 

Post#203 » by KGdaBom » Sat Nov 21, 2020 6:47 pm

shrink wrote:
minimus wrote:
shrink wrote:It also feels to me that Rosas wants all the players that want to be here To be happy happy. I suspect Edwards was chosen over Ball to reward DLo for wanting to be here. GM’s should not do this.


First, whats wrong to choose Edwards, who wants to be here over Wiseman and Ball who clearly don't want? It is clear that Edwards has same level of talent and physical tools as Wiseman and Ball. Second, I wonder how far your DLo hate will lead you? In every DLo related topic you try to find negative things. It is really annoying my friend. Finally, during official rookies introduction Rosas said that Edwards showed himself head and shoulders above others.

It is disrespect when you see opinions you disagree with to label the poster as a hater. I know you’re better than that. Regarding DLo, I don’t see anyone arguing with my defensive concerns - it’s just that you don’t want to hear them. The defensive concerns are legitimate and extreme, and should affect the choices a GM and a coach need to make.

I believe Ball is more talented, and has a higher floor-ceiling combo than Edwards. But even if you think it was close, the pick should have been Wiseman, because I think he appealed the most to GSW, and even if that failed, he appealed to CHA. This was lost leverage.

Rosas said his selection was the best? What a shocker! I bet every GM said the same thing about their selection.

Ball is not in the same realm with Edwards for talent and Rubio is better than Ball in EVERY WAY and we got him for part of a #17 draft pick. Picking Ball would have been idiotic to the extreme. We also got a similar player to Ball in Bolmaro who also is known for great defense.
shrink
RealGM
Posts: 45,238
And1: 5,867
Joined: Sep 26, 2005

Re: Beasley Re-Sign for 4 years / $60M 

Post#204 » by shrink » Sat Nov 21, 2020 6:49 pm

Baseline81 wrote:
shrink wrote:For the record, it’s not just me. I have heard this brought up in all three of the three national podcasts I have listened to over the last week. In fact, one host called MIN the club that most bases it’s moves on emotions, and not facts, and this has been true since the Country Club days.

Look, I’m not trying to just troll here, and it’s fine if people disagree with my opinions. I just think they are worth discussing, because others outside of our organization - people that don’t hold a fandom towards individual players - are seeing a pattern here.

I want the Wolves to do well too, just like everyone here, but I am very concerned.

Besides Givony, who else mentioned this about Russell not wanting the Wolves to draft Ball? Note Ball was considered the pick by ESPN/Draft Express until the day or night prior to the draft. I thought the rumor was there much earlier.

You’re right - this was out much earlier, but more in the conceptual stage, before I heard Givony specifically say Russell could drive this train, I listened to Schmitz (on Zach Lowe or Windhorst) and Hollinger and Duncan. All three said they thought Ball was the best pick, but MIN might not pick him because they might not want to offend DLo. One (I think Duncan) said this was ridiculous, you don’t avoid the best star talent to save the feelings of the 20th best PG in the league.

Schmitz repeated this the day before the draft on Dunc’d On. This might be something people here want to listen to, because at least Schmitz was comforting about the concept of what Edwards could be, even if he thought it was the wrong (but likely) pick.
Baseline81
Senior
Posts: 625
And1: 250
Joined: Jan 18, 2009

Re: Beasley Re-Sign for 4 years / $60M 

Post#205 » by Baseline81 » Sat Nov 21, 2020 6:53 pm

shrink wrote:I heard this before Givoni. I listened to Schmitz, and Hollinger and Duncan. All three said they thought Ball was the best pick, but MIN might not pick him because they might not want to offend DLo. One (I think Duncan) said this was ridiculous, you don’t avoid the best star talent to save the feelings of the 20th best PG in the league.

Is that them guessing, just as I imagine they would have said the same for Wiseman to Towns? Or did they have any sources telling them this?
Worm Guts
Forum Mod - Timberwolves
Forum Mod - Timberwolves
Posts: 23,639
And1: 7,771
Joined: Dec 27, 2003
     

Re: Beasley Re-Sign for 4 years / $60M 

Post#206 » by Worm Guts » Sat Nov 21, 2020 6:53 pm

shrink wrote:
Baseline81 wrote:
shrink wrote:For the record, it’s not just me. I have heard this brought up in all three of the three national podcasts I have listened to over the last week. In fact, one host called MIN the club that most bases it’s moves on emotions, and not facts, and this has been true since the Country Club days.

Look, I’m not trying to just troll here, and it’s fine if people disagree with my opinions. I just think they are worth discussing, because others outside of our organization - people that don’t hold a fandom towards individual players - are seeing a pattern here.

I want the Wolves to do well too, just like everyone here, but I am very concerned.

Besides Givony, who else mentioned this about Russell not wanting the Wolves to draft Ball? Note Ball was considered the pick by ESPN/Draft Express until the day or night prior to the draft. I thought the rumor was there much earlier.

I heard this before Givoni. I listened to Schmitz, and Hollinger and Duncan. All three said they thought Ball was the best pick, but MIN might not pick him because they might not want to offend DLo. One (I think Duncan) said this was ridiculous, you don’t avoid the best star talent to save the feelings of the 20th best PG in the league.


But does offending DLo by default offend Towns? We kind of bent over backwards to make this DLo-Towns thing happen, so we probably have to give it a legitimate chance to work.
shrink
RealGM
Posts: 45,238
And1: 5,867
Joined: Sep 26, 2005

Re: Beasley Re-Sign for 4 years / $60M 

Post#207 » by shrink » Sat Nov 21, 2020 6:54 pm

Baseline81 wrote:
shrink wrote:I heard this before Givoni. I listened to Schmitz, and Hollinger and Duncan. All three said they thought Ball was the best pick, but MIN might not pick him because they might not want to offend DLo. One (I think Duncan) said this was ridiculous, you don’t avoid the best star talent to save the feelings of the 20th best PG in the league.

Is that them guessing, just as I imagine they would have said the same for Wiseman to Towns? Or did they have any sources telling them this?

You’re right - guessing.
Jedzz
General Manager
Posts: 9,067
And1: 1,976
Joined: Oct 05, 2018
   

Re: Beasley Re-Sign for 4 years / $60M 

Post#208 » by Jedzz » Sat Nov 21, 2020 6:58 pm

Baseline81 wrote:
shrink wrote:For the record, it’s not just me. I have heard this brought up in all three of the three national podcasts I have listened to over the last week. In fact, one host called MIN the club that most bases it’s moves on emotions, and not facts, and this has been true since the Country Club days.

Look, I’m not trying to just troll here, and it’s fine if people disagree with my opinions. I just think they are worth discussing, because others outside of our organization - people that don’t hold a fandom towards individual players - are seeing a pattern here.

I want the Wolves to do well too, just like everyone here, but I am very concerned.

Besides Givony, who else mentioned this about Russell not wanting the Wolves to draft Ball? Note Ball was considered the pick by ESPN/Draft Express until the day or night prior to the draft. I thought the rumor was there much earlier.


I'm not sure who shrink is pissed about keeping now in this conversation here but this is a beasley thread and resigning a 40% capable shooter for a team that absolutely needed better shooting has absolutely nothing to do with country club emotions. If he's talking about someone else, carry on. But drafting Ball with questionable shooting ability lately and shot selections based on his ego to ponder was a very risky move for this teams scheme. Rubio comes with the similar to better passing, proven, and a known level of shooting ability now. It allowed them to take Edwards and still bring in a playmaker creator. More or less getting the attributes of two of the top 3 hyped players this year. If you were one of those sold on the hyped 3 as options and any kind of need still for guards and creators then this was a sneaky good move. I of course didn't want a single additional guard signed, I wanted Beasley to stay and for them to draft a SF that can shoot and defend, and hopefully who had the developed size to hit the ground running here. Options were there. That wasn't their direction. Oh well. I talked for months about my hopes but I can still move on. Some of these others simply don't appear able to move on. They are the emotional ones.
Baseline81
Senior
Posts: 625
And1: 250
Joined: Jan 18, 2009

Re: Beasley Re-Sign for 4 years / $60M 

Post#209 » by Baseline81 » Sat Nov 21, 2020 7:03 pm

https://hoopshype.com/2020/11/21/how-malik-beasleys-deal-with-the-timberwolves-happened/

The Minnesota Timberwolves and Malik Beasley agreed to a four-year, $60 million deal as first reported by The Athletic. The contract contains a team option on the fourth year of the contract, as HoopsHype reported.

The deal was negotiated by agent Brian Jungreis of Par-Lay Sports and Entertainment.

The New York Knicks also called to express interest in Beasley, league sources told HoopsHype. The Milwaukee Bucks were another team who inquired.

Minnesota came into their meeting with Beasley determined to close a deal. The Timberwolves rented a house on the water and brought Beasley’s chef to cook dinner for everyone.

Timberwolves brass on hand included general manager Gersson Rosas, coach Ryan Saunders, assistant general manager Joe Branch, and others, league sources told HoopsHype.

The team showed video highlights of Beasley during his time with the team, messages from Twins star Nelson Cruz, local business owners, customized Vikings jerseys, newspaper cutouts, and more. It left an imprint on Beasley, as well as Rosas and the organization publicly supporting him during his legal situation.

After being acquired by Minnesota, Beasley started all 14 games he appeared in and averaged 20.7 points on 47.2 percent shooting from the field and 42.6 percent from downtown with 5.1 rebounds in 33.1 minutes per game.

Beasley, who will turn 24 in a few days, is a part of the team’s core heading into the future centered around Karl-Anthony Towns and D’Angelo Russell.

The team also would like to retain fellow restricted free agent Juancho Hernangomez as free agency continues.
shrink
RealGM
Posts: 45,238
And1: 5,867
Joined: Sep 26, 2005

Re: Beasley Re-Sign for 4 years / $60M 

Post#210 » by shrink » Sat Nov 21, 2020 7:12 pm

Worm Guts wrote:But does offending DLo by default offend Towns? We kind of bent over backwards to make this DLo-Towns thing happen, so we probably have to give it a legitimate chance to work.

I understand this point, and it’s the crucial one. It is also kind of where I struggle.

A year ago, we had Towns, a new GM and a lot of question marks. KAT can fit with literally any non- center NBA player on the planet, so our possibilities were wide open. Rosas came in an made a lot of moves, nothing really consequential until the Wiggins trade. I am OK with this trade - Wiggins had to go - but that’s where I see we really started limiting ourselves.

When you acquire DLo, you get above-average shooting and great passing. But you still have constrained yourself with a different max deal. You have filled one of the most easily-filled positions. You have locked in a poor defender, who doesn’t really have the athleticism to get much better. I’ll take that over Wiggins, but you see how our pathways were severely narrowed.

Next, we thankfully won the lottery. But with DLo on the roster, it made drafting Ball more of a predicament - twice the predicament since Wiseman overlapped Towns as well. So I think that limited our choices.

Then, we used the James Johnson contract to salary match Rubio. I think this is a good move, but it certainly could have been orchestrated to fit DLo’s defensive lacking with a kid who will take the tougher defensive assignment, and is a Team-first, willing passer who won’t mind if DLo gets his FGAs. But using JJ’s contract this way further limits how we fix the gaping hole at starting PF.

You are probably right that we need to see what a KAT-DLo pairing can do. But they better do well, for all the accommodating we’ve done here, specifically seeing more effort on the defensive end. We have certainly paid to give them this opportunity.
shrink
RealGM
Posts: 45,238
And1: 5,867
Joined: Sep 26, 2005

Re: Beasley Re-Sign for 4 years / $60M 

Post#211 » by shrink » Sat Nov 21, 2020 7:23 pm

Suppose we took a different course. Wiggins still needs to go DLo is not KAT’s pal, so we trade Andrew for an equally bad contract - let’s say, Tobias Harris (we keep the 2021 MIN 1st). We still do the RoCo trade (still makes sense), and add Beasley and Juancho. We win the lottery and draft Ball, and re-sign Beasley.

Is this a more promising team?

Ball, Rubio (assuming we can still make this work), Beasley
Beasley, Okogie
Culver, Layman
Harris, Juancho
KAT, Naz

We’d be bad giving LaMelo the keys, but we’d get a lottery pick next year. Towns has four guaranteed years left. is he still happy to/3 a Wolf, and the direction of the team? It certainly gives Beasley a role where he can earn his money.
Baseline81
Senior
Posts: 625
And1: 250
Joined: Jan 18, 2009

Re: Beasley Re-Sign for 4 years / $60M 

Post#212 » by Baseline81 » Sat Nov 21, 2020 7:36 pm

shrink wrote:Suppose we took a different course. Wiggins still needs to go DLo is not KAT’s pal, so we trade Andrew for an equally bad contract - let’s say, Tobias Harris (we keep the 2021 MIN 1st). We still do the RoCo trade (still makes sense), and add Beasley and Juancho. We win the lottery and draft Ball, and re-sign Beasley.

Is this a more promising team?

Ball, Rubio (assuming we can still make this work), Beasley
Beasley, Okogie
Culver, Layman
Harris, Juancho
KAT, Naz

We’d be bad giving LaMelo the keys, but we’d get a lottery pick next year. Towns has four guaranteed years left. is he still happy to/3 a Wolf, and the direction of the team? It certainly gives Beasley a role where he can earn his money.

That team is top-10 lottery bound, IMO. As a result, Towns likely has one foot out the door.
Jedzz
General Manager
Posts: 9,067
And1: 1,976
Joined: Oct 05, 2018
   

Re: Beasley Re-Sign for 4 years / $60M 

Post#213 » by Jedzz » Sat Nov 21, 2020 7:53 pm

shrink wrote:
Baseline81 wrote:
shrink wrote:I heard this before Givoni. I listened to Schmitz, and Hollinger and Duncan. All three said they thought Ball was the best pick, but MIN might not pick him because they might not want to offend DLo. One (I think Duncan) said this was ridiculous, you don’t avoid the best star talent to save the feelings of the 20th best PG in the league.

Is that them guessing, just as I imagine they would have said the same for Wiseman to Towns? Or did they have any sources telling them this?

You’re right - guessing.


They also had to take into account that Ball has been shooting like crap for a while now, has a shot selection issue based on his ego, and lack of defense issue so far. They had to make a determination on whether he would even listen to them. If you couldn't cut through some of this crap hype it's on you.

Can you not see what Rosas did here? I didn't even want one new guard brought in. But I still think I can see positives in what Rosas chose to do. By taking Edwards and then getting Rubio he has gotten the great instinctual passing people were hoping from Ball yet it's already a proven NBA court trait in Rubio. Plus Rubio isn't an ego tripping youngster and we can see how his shot has developed and where that's actually at in the NBA now. There is a mountain of risk avoided here and they still took a shot at a player with a high upside. They also didn't exactly dump the picks just for a win now player like Dlo had publcly made a reasonable hope for known. But they did at the same time, give that new youngster another level head to help lead him and take the pressure off him.
shrink
RealGM
Posts: 45,238
And1: 5,867
Joined: Sep 26, 2005

Re: Beasley Re-Sign for 4 years / $60M 

Post#214 » by shrink » Sat Nov 21, 2020 7:54 pm

Baseline81 wrote:
shrink wrote:Suppose we took a different course. Wiggins still needs to go DLo is not KAT’s pal, so we trade Andrew for an equally bad contract - let’s say, Tobias Harris (we keep the 2021 MIN 1st). We still do the RoCo trade (still makes sense), and add Beasley and Juancho. We win the lottery and draft Ball, and re-sign Beasley.

Is this a more promising team?

Ball, Rubio (assuming we can still make this work), Beasley
Beasley, Okogie
Culver, Layman
Harris, Juancho
KAT, Naz

We’d be bad giving LaMelo the keys, but we’d get a lottery pick next year. Towns has four guaranteed years left. is he still happy to/3 a Wolf, and the direction of the team? It certainly gives Beasley a role where he can earn his money.

That team is top-10 lottery bound, IMO. As a result, Towns likely has one foot out the door.

Do you think our team is better? Or that KAT is more likely to stay with a bad team with his buddy here?

DLo, Rubio
Beasley, Edwards, Okogie
Culver, Layman
Juancho
KAT, Naz
minimus
General Manager
Posts: 8,606
And1: 2,213
Joined: Jan 28, 2011
Location: Germany, Stuttgart area
 

Re: Beasley Re-Sign for 4 years / $60M 

Post#215 » by minimus » Sat Nov 21, 2020 8:00 pm

shrink wrote:
minimus wrote:
shrink wrote:It also feels to me that Rosas wants all the players that want to be here To be happy happy. I suspect Edwards was chosen over Ball to reward DLo for wanting to be here. GM’s should not do this.


First, whats wrong to choose Edwards, who wants to be here over Wiseman and Ball who clearly don't want? It is clear that Edwards has same level of talent and physical tools as Wiseman and Ball. Second, I wonder how far your DLo hate will lead you? In every DLo related topic you try to find negative things. It is really annoying my friend. Finally, during official rookies introduction Rosas said that Edwards showed himself head and shoulders above others.

It is disrespect when you see opinions you disagree with to label the poster as a hater. I know you’re better than that. Regarding DLo, I don’t see anyone arguing with my defensive concerns - it’s just that you don’t want to hear them. The defensive concerns are legitimate and extreme, and should affect the choices a GM and a coach need to make.

I believe Ball is more talented, and has a higher floor-ceiling combo than Edwards. But even if you think it was close, the pick should have been Wiseman, because I think he appealed the most to GSW, and even if that failed, he appealed to CHA. This was lost leverage.

Rosas said his selection was the best? What a shocker! I bet every GM said the same thing about their selection.


I have nothing but respect for you, shrink. But you color everything in negative when it is DLo related. Here is what DLo said about playing with LaMelo

“I wouldn’t mind it, honestly, if – if that’s what it was and that’s what they see in the future…man, I’ve been in so many situations, I’d just attack it like any other.”




Around 33min

You constructed whole theory on this, and you are keeping playing this mind game on this board, on general board. I find this disrespectful. No one here is arguing about DLo defense. The problems with this approach is that you keep in microscope one problem, while ALL positive things kind of slip from view. And more importantly, we can pretend that we are in a perfect world. But MIN fans have been living in a basketball nightmare, you keep bashing Rosas for DLo, now Beasley. Like really? Neither Wiseman nor LaMelo are not an answer to our needs. Rosas decided to have two tradable contracts: Beasley and Rubio, instead of outbidding other teams for someone like Gallinari, Jeremi Grant, Bertans. Yes, they are PFs that we need, but should we shoot ourselves in the foot and overpay them? We are still collecting assets. This roster is still not finished product.

Krapinsky wrote:We also have to remind oursleves that we aren't the Lakers, we don't have a hall of fame coach like Popovic, we don't play in a tax friendly state, we have MN winters, and we have historically been a laughing stock of a franchise. All these factors mean that we aren't going to get discounts like the Harrel contract, and no regime that has ever been here has been able to sign free agents to cap friendly deals. It just doesn't happen when you aren't a championship contender or playing in a big market.


This is reality check. We are not going to be a FA destination in foreseeable future. For us it is simply not enough to have cap space. No FA will sign here. Rosas in my opinion uses cap space wisely, as they are ready to move forward, ready for trades. Look at what happens in CHA, DET, WAS, ATL, SAS they paid a lot to get role players. We have got KAT, DLo, Beasley, Rubio, Edwards, who barely played together, why just not to root for them?
Jedzz
General Manager
Posts: 9,067
And1: 1,976
Joined: Oct 05, 2018
   

Re: Beasley Re-Sign for 4 years / $60M 

Post#216 » by Jedzz » Sat Nov 21, 2020 8:06 pm

shrink wrote:
Baseline81 wrote:
shrink wrote:Suppose we took a different course. Wiggins still needs to go DLo is not KAT’s pal, so we trade Andrew for an equally bad contract - let’s say, Tobias Harris (we keep the 2021 MIN 1st). We still do the RoCo trade (still makes sense), and add Beasley and Juancho. We win the lottery and draft Ball, and re-sign Beasley.

Is this a more promising team?

Ball, Rubio (assuming we can still make this work), Beasley
Beasley, Okogie
Culver, Layman
Harris, Juancho
KAT, Naz

We’d be bad giving LaMelo the keys, but we’d get a lottery pick next year. Towns has four guaranteed years left. is he still happy to/3 a Wolf, and the direction of the team? It certainly gives Beasley a role where he can earn his money.

That team is top-10 lottery bound, IMO. As a result, Towns likely has one foot out the door.

Do you think our team is better? Or that KAT is more likely to stay with a bad team with his buddy here?

DLo, Rubio
Beasley, Edwards, Okogie
Culver, Layman
Juancho
KAT, Naz


yes the team is better because it doesn't have to be how you have illustrated it. Culver doesn't have to be the starting SF/wing. You've placed him there for effect. Edwards might come in as a rookie twice as aggressive and ready to get more done and push Culver right off the plate. He might not, but you don't know either. Plus, I start Layman over Culver right now 100% at the SF/Wing role. Culver has more to prove yet before earning that kind of starting gig.

They lost their tails last season rotating through players. With Dlo/Kat together all season they are twice better already. Add Beasley's shooting and desire to win, add Edwards' size/ability, add Culver in his second year and Okogie in his third now, more developed. Juancho's shooting, Naz in a second year. This team is now potentially 35-40 wins to me before I see them play. They could do more. Count the numbers. The 40 threes is still going to be the goal only now they have more shooters all season. That by itself will be a huge difference. But they've added some wing size and stronger cutting and finishing, a heck of a lot more creative playmaking. Add it up. This is 100% better direction then just throwing the ball into Ball's hands and tellnig him to make breakfast with it.
Slim Tubby
Bench Warmer
Posts: 1,323
And1: 755
Joined: Jun 03, 2017
         

Re: Beasley Re-Sign for 4 years / $60M 

Post#217 » by Slim Tubby » Sat Nov 21, 2020 8:09 pm

shrink wrote:
Krapinsky wrote:
shrink wrote:Last point. I struggle to come up with Rosas motivation for this contract, and my main theory is he wanted to make Beasley happy. The other explanation I could have is that he traded the #24 to get him and Juancho, and he didn’t want that pick to be wasted.

If this is his thinking, it needs to end. Once he traded the pick, it became a sunk cost. Nothing he could do after the trade was going to get the pick back. He needed to make the best decision for the Wolves regardless of how we got to that position, even if we didn’t want to match an overpaid deal so he would take flack for giving away a pick for nothing.


I think the contract had to do with two things: (1) Beasley had other suitors in the Knicks and Bucks, and maybe Rosas was confident that Beasley could have got the same money elsewhere; and (2), I think more importantly, with the Wolves hardcapped this year (and next with Rubio Edwards), they did not have many options to add talent in free agency or via trade, so options are limited to resigning their own RFA or looking at much lesser options.

I also don't think the deal is that bad, considering the premium teams are paying for shooting, the team option for the 4th year, and the threat that Beasley could have just signed the qualifying offer and played out the year (which i think is problematic because we aren't projected to have cap space next year).

We also have to remind oursleves that we aren't the Lakers, we don't have a hall of fame coach like Popovic, we don't play in a tax friendly state, we have MN winters, and we have historically been a laughing stock of a franchise. All these factors mean that we aren't going to get discounts like the Harrel contract, and no regime that has ever been here has been able to sign free agents to cap friendly deals. It just doesn't happen when you aren't a championship contender or playing in a big market.

I don’t know if the Knicks were suitors, or if they were offering this much, but the Bucks have no cap space, and can’t offer more than the MLE, and as an RFA, we could match if we chose.

The Wolves aren’t hardcapped. They haven’t brought in a player for the 2021 season in a sign and trade, and they haven’t used the exceptions that trigger it ( BAE or more of the MLE than the tax-payers MLE)

If Beasley played for the QO, we would trade him, and as a $5 mil expiring, he would have decent trade value anywhere.

I agree that we aren’t a UFA site. We certainly should have done better with our RFA’s, especially one that claims to want to be here. I feel we did act like the Lakers in one regard - we were 2016 Mitch Kupchak, overpaying for borderline starters like Mozgov and Luol Deng because we were so scared we would miss out.

Now you’re comparing the Beasley signing to Mozgov and Deng’s???????? You need to take a breathe and walk away from the board for 24 hours.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Glen Taylor: "Is this moron #1 (Layden)? Put moron #2 (Thibs) on the phone."
Jedzz
General Manager
Posts: 9,067
And1: 1,976
Joined: Oct 05, 2018
   

Re: Beasley Re-Sign for 4 years / $60M 

Post#218 » by Jedzz » Sat Nov 21, 2020 8:12 pm

minimus wrote:You constructed whole theory on this, and you are keeping playing this mind game on this board, on general board. I find this disrespectful. No one here is arguing about DLo defense. The problems with this approach is that you keep in microscope one problem, while ALL positive things kind of slip from view. And more importantly, we can pretend that we are in a perfect world. But MIN fans have been living in a basketball nightmare, you keep bashing Rosas for DLo, now Beasley. Like really? Neither Wiseman nor LaMelo are not an answer to our needs. Rosas decided to have two tradable contracts: Beasley and Rubio, instead of outbidding other teams for someone like Gallinari, Jeremi Grant, Bertans. Yes, they are PFs that we need, but should we shoot ourselves in the foot and overpay them? We are still collecting assets. This roster is still not finished product.


good post, reasonable
TwolvesFanRome
Pro Prospect
Posts: 852
And1: 250
Joined: Aug 25, 2014
Location: Roma
   

Re: Beasley Re-Sign for 4 years / $60M 

Post#219 » by TwolvesFanRome » Sat Nov 21, 2020 8:12 pm

According to me we need a time out ahahaaahahaaha
"...I want to compliment him, we all expected that he would take up the game, we have prepared the plan race on him, we have doubled. And, as usual, he did what he wanted..."

Zelimir Obradovic, talking about Dejan Bodiroga
Jedzz
General Manager
Posts: 9,067
And1: 1,976
Joined: Oct 05, 2018
   

Re: Beasley Re-Sign for 4 years / $60M 

Post#220 » by Jedzz » Sat Nov 21, 2020 8:30 pm

Baseline81 wrote:
shrink wrote:Suppose we took a different course. ///and rewrite current history
Is this a more promising team?

Ball, Rubio (assuming we can still make this work), Beasley
Beasley, Okogie
Culver, Layman
Harris, Juancho
KAT, Naz

We’d be bad giving LaMelo the keys, but we’d get a lottery pick next year. Towns has four guaranteed years left. is he still happy to/3 a Wolf, and the direction of the team? It certainly gives Beasley a role where he can earn his money.

That team is top-10 lottery bound, IMO. As a result, Towns likely has one foot out the door.


This is exactly what teams like the Warriors and many across the league wanted the Wolves to do. Continue to stink and chase the lotto picks. Definitely what Warriors wanted to see occur for the Wolves 2021 pick to bear fruit for them.

I would argue some Wolves fans might like being terrible and in the lotto so we can be near the top of draft again next year. Look no further than this example where he describes that as the likely goal of it. My opinion, they might enjoy this more than season play and results.

Return to Minnesota Timberwolves