The Tim Connelly Model: From Denver to Minnesota

[Klomp]

A lot of discussion around this general topic right now, so I felt we should give it the attention it deserves.

Let me start with this...

A lot of consternation around the Gobert trade last year had to do with trading away all of those picks. But here's something to think about...Denver didn't really rely on young guys once they had the foundation built. Young guys are often unreliable. In 2020, they traded away Beasley, Hernangomez and Vanderbilt rather than holding onto them as cost-controlled assets. You could say they "lost"the trade because I believe they only got one 1st in return (which became Zeke Nnaji), but I don't think you'll find them shedding tears over it. They were building around 24-year old Jokic, 22-year old Murray and 25-year old Porter Jr. (plus other young guys), they didn't need to keep stockpiling youth.

The picture was clear here when he took over. While 27-year old Towns and 26-year old Russell were a little older, the key building blocks everyone identified were 21-year old Edwards and 22-year old McDaniels along with a number of other young guys. Now it's about marinating that youth and letting it develop. Bringing in veterans like Gobert and Conley help push that forward, just as a Millsap, Gordon or Barton did in Denver.

What youth did Tim Connelly bring to Denver since 2019 via the draft?
2019 None
2020.1.22 Zeke Nnaji
2021.1.26 Bones Hyland

Our board would call that a franchise-killer for a small-market team, not to supplement the back half of the roster with youth because you traded away all of your picks. But I believe the reason to do that is because you don't need significant youth development, especially since the prospects probably wouldn't get the on-court development time they need on a contending team.

[Klomp]

I'm going to also bring over this post from another thread, since it was part of the inspiration for starting this thread.

Connolly designed the Nuggets with the same type of roster structure we have in MIN

Supermax KAT, Jokic
Max: Gobert (bit over), Murray
Max: Ant, MPJ
Close to Max: Jaden, Aaron Gordon
MLEish: SloMo?, KCP

And the rest trying to find surrounding cheap talent in the draft and free agency to fill out the team.


To me, this is the blueprint I would use for a contender. I believe that you need to get the most talent-dollars on the floor, and with shortened playoff rotations, I’d want to spend the bulk of my payroll on the top 10 players. The other five roster spots and three two-way players are needed to get you through a marathon season, but I think vet min and rookies fill those salary spots.

………………………

The salary cap for 24-25 is $143, but the supermax is $180. That will be the payroll goal for the wolves. $180 is 125% of the cap. So ..

35% KAT
31% Gobert
25% Ant
20% Jaden
5%: 5 Vet Min deals

9% 5 more, ($13 mil?) non vet-min players.
————-
125%

You can see the argument why one of the big four may need to go, if we want to keep someone like Anderson or Naz. Otherwise we jump over once, and reel it back. .. the cap will rise faster that the raises, so we will add percentages over time doing nothing. But the superlux rule does what it intends - it makes it difficult for GSW, LAC, DEN, or next year, MIN, to hoard multiple huge salary guys.

[shrink]

Thanks, and thanks for starting a thread about this. I never felt comfortable posting that in the NBA Finals.

We all have our opinions about salaries, and what real NBA GM’s think. We have a reality though that shows that this financial structure led to a dominating championship.

Hopefully the fact that Connolly built that team, and built ours similarly, will relieve a bit of worry about Towns’ or Gobert’s contracts. I trust Connolly, and he deserves some trust from everyone.

[Klomp]

Connolly designed the Nuggets with the same type of roster structure we have in MIN

Supermax KAT, Jokic
Max: Gobert (bit over), Murray
Max: Ant, MPJ
Close to Max: Jaden, Aaron Gordon
MLEish: SloMo?, KCP

And the rest trying to find surrounding cheap talent in the draft and free agency to fill out the team.


To me, this is the blueprint I would use for a contender. I believe that you need to get the most talent-dollars on the floor, and with shortened playoff rotations, I’d want to spend the bulk of my payroll on the top 10 players. The other five roster spots and three two-way players are needed to get you through a marathon season, but I think vet min and rookies fill those salary spots.

………………………

The salary cap for 24-25 is $143, but the supermax is $180. That will be the payroll goal for the wolves. $180 is 125% of the cap. So ..

35% KAT
31% Gobert
25% Ant
20% Jaden
5%: 5 Vet Min deals

9% 5 more, ($13 mil?) non vet-min players.
————-
125%

You can see the argument why one of the big four may need to go, if we want to keep someone like Anderson or Naz. Otherwise we jump over once, and reel it back. .. the cap will rise faster that the raises, so we will add percentages over time doing nothing. But the superlux rule does what it intends - it makes it difficult for GSW, LAC, DEN, or next year, MIN, to hoard multiple huge salary guys.

I wanted to build on this a bit too. What I've been thinking about is the penalties against the second apron offenders. Here's a few that I could find:

1. Can't use the MLE: OK, this probably gets the most headlines, but if you have a core group locked in that's 8-9 players deep of rotation-quality guys, the MLE loses its importance to that team.
2. Can't sign buyout players: Has Minnesota ever been a big player in the buyout market?
3. Can't send out cash: This probably happens more than we realize, but still a rather minuscule penalty.
4. Can't trade picks 7 years out: As opposed to our 5 or 6 year limitation currently?
5. Can't add salary in trades: This would probably be the biggest limitation, but overall not that restrictive.

[shrink]

And if you stay over the superlux, I think your untradable future pick goes to the end of the 1st round.

This is the painful one, because, 7 years after a championship run, who knows if your team needs a pick.

That said, the goal is to win a ring, not get a random pick 7 years down the line. It’s a sacrifice, but a sacrifice I think championship teams will make. We already see teams trade away unprotected picks, far into the future.

[Klomp]

And if you stay over the superlux, I think your untradable future pick goes to the end of the 1st round.

This is the painful one, because, 7 years after a championship run, who knows if your team needs a pick.

That said, the goal is to win a ring, not get a random pick 7 years down the line. It’s a sacrifice, but a sacrifice I think championship teams will make. We already see teams trade away unprotected picks, far into the future.

And let's look at Minnesota specifically. We're talking about a couple-year period before the cap spikes.

Going into next year if we bring everyone back, our rotation has 22-year old Edwards, 23-year old McDaniels, 24-year old Reid, 25-year old Alexander-Walker plus the upside of 21-year old Minott and 22-year old Moore locked in for the next 3 years probably at a minimum. That's six guys under 25 years old, plus we haven't even gotten to veterans like Towns, Gobert and Conley (or whoever he turns into for the future), nor vets Anderson or Gobert. That's 11 players on a 15-man roster, and we could also talk about young guys like Garza, McLaughlin and Knight who could easily be brought back to round out the back of the roster for dirt cheap.

There's just not a ton of roster space available, so why are these draft pick losses so important to where we should be afraid of the second apron in the next year or two?

[SO_MONEY]

There is no excuse for what they did to this team!

[shrink]

And let's look at Minnesota specifically. We're talking about a couple-year period before the cap spikes.

Going into next year if we bring everyone back, our rotation has 22-year old Edwards, 23-year old McDaniels, 24-year old Reid, 25-year old Alexander-Walker plus the upside of 21-year old Minott and 22-year old Moore locked in for the next 3 years probably at a minimum. That's six guys under 25 years old, plus we haven't even gotten to veterans like Towns, Gobert and Conley (or whoever he turns into for the future), nor vets Anderson or Gobert. That's 11 players on a 15-man roster, and we could also talk about young guys like Garza, McLaughlin and Knight who could easily be brought back to round out the back of the roster for dirt cheap.

There's just not a ton of roster space available, so why are these draft pick losses so important to where we should be afraid of the second apron in the next year or two?

We can also expect Connolly to pick up random second rounders over the next few years as well, like the three he got in the Mike Conley, NAW deal. We have a good GM with a solid history of finding usable players with second round picks too.

To be honest, I was thinking MIA is built in this same vein. They paid (or will pay) stars like Jimmy and Bam, then spend big sums on other starters (Lowry/Herro), maybe Beal soon, Duncan as their fifth guy brings their starters payroll to $150 mil next year. Then they flood the bench with cheap guys they hope will be able to contribute. Half their team made $2 mil or less, to afford a top-heavy roster.

[TimberKat]

And let's look at Minnesota specifically. We're talking about a couple-year period before the cap spikes.

Going into next year if we bring everyone back, our rotation has 22-year old Edwards, 23-year old McDaniels, 24-year old Reid, 25-year old Alexander-Walker plus the upside of 21-year old Minott and 22-year old Moore locked in for the next 3 years probably at a minimum. That's six guys under 25 years old, plus we haven't even gotten to veterans like Towns, Gobert and Conley (or whoever he turns into for the future), nor vets Anderson or Gobert. That's 11 players on a 15-man roster, and we could also talk about young guys like Garza, McLaughlin and Knight who could easily be brought back to round out the back of the roster for dirt cheap.

There's just not a ton of roster space available, so why are these draft pick losses so important to where we should be afraid of the second apron in the next year or two?

We can also expect Connolly to pick up random second rounders over the next few years as well, like the three he got in the Mike Conley, NAW deal. We have a good GM with a solid history of finding usable players with second round picks too.

To be honest, I was thinking MIA is built in this same vein. They paid (or will pay) stars like Jimmy and Bam, then spend big sums on other starters (Lowry/Herro), maybe Beal soon, Duncan as their fifth guy brings their starters payroll to $150 mil next year. Then they flood the bench with cheap guys they hope will be able to contribute. Half their team made $2 mil or less, to afford a top-heavy roster.

Right, in addition to all that's been said. I already posted in the other thread that you can sign Naz and NWL. We will just be 1 year over 2nd apron in 24-25 because salary cap jump in 25-26.

To me the real financial play here is to swap Conley's salary slot for a longer term contract of same value so you don't lose the slot in 24-25. Ideally for a PG. Stay above 2nd apron for 1 year. It come back down in 25-26 because projected cap jump.

Bottom line, trade Towns/Gobert/Ant/JMac for on court reasons. Having them won't hurt us financially for signing Naz, NWL, Ant and JMcD and there is real financial number and cap rule reasons to back that up ( of course assuming my amateur math is correct).

[minimus]

While some financial similarities can be found I dont think that MIN is following DEN under Connelly, because I think more important is set of players archetypes which can be developed into identity, in other words contracts do not show on the floor as much as skills:

- DEN is built around Jokic postup, passing, MPJ and Murray shooting. Last year MIN was build around similar axis Towns-DLo, which was legacy model from Rosas vision. Ironically, the pinnacle of development of Rosas vision would be Towns-Anderson-MCD-Edwards-DLo starting five with Reid-Beverley-Beasley-Vando. Did not happen.

- this season was all about twin-towers experiment. But it has not given us any confirmation yet because of unique set of factors such as injuries, trades etc

- if we pivot from twin-towers experiment, it means we will build around Edwards-MCD duo. With high probability it will be tough, defensive minded team identity. I dont see any DEN comparison here either.

[urinesane]

While some financial similarities can be found I dont think that MIN is following DEN under Connelly, because I think more important is set of players archetypes which can be developed into identity, in other words contracts do not show on the floor as much as skills:

- DEN is built around Jokic postup, passing, MPJ and Murray shooting. Last year MIN was build around similar axis Towns-DLo, which was legacy model from Rosas vision. Ironically, the pinnacle of development of Rosas vision would be Towns-Anderson-MCD-Edwards-DLo starting five with Reid-Beverley-Beasley-Vando. Did not happen.

- this season was all about twin-towers experiment. But it has not given us any confirmation yet because of unique set of factors such as injuries, trades etc

- if we pivot from twin-towers experiment, it means we will build around Edwards-MCD duo. With high probability it will be tough, defensive minded team identity. I dont see any DEN comparison here either.

I think Connelly knew what he built in Denver, saw the struggles the Wolves against Memphis, and pivoted to build a team that could counter what he built in Denver. The biggest factors aren't just talent, it's about getting guys to buy in, play like a team (play for each other), and create something that is more than the sum of its individual parts.

I think KAT/Ant are similar duo wise to Jokic/Murray mainly in the way that they don't care as much about their personal stats as they do about playing for the guy next to them. Connelly is building a team, not a group of individuals.

He's trying to create an orchestra rather than a rock band (that often fall apart when success comes knocking due to egos and individuality taking priority over the whole).

In order to truly create long term success you need to build a foundation on principles, not people. The pieces will change, some players will blossom and leave for bigger pay days, or they will go past their prime. When you build the foundation based on the talent of individuals, it will eventually crumble. When you build it on concepts and culture, it's easier to shift gears and keep it on the right path.

[shrink]

While some financial similarities can be found I dont think that MIN is following DEN under Connelly, because I think more important is set of players archetypes which can be developed into identity, in other words contracts do not show on the floor as much as skills.

When you’re a team like DEN or MIN, who isn’t a free agent destination, you don’t get to choose the skillset of the max players that you get. You find the best players in the draft that have a chance to be stars, regardless of particular skills. Then you find a coach that can turn that talent into wins,

Here, both teams were constructed with three stars that grew from their own draft picks, one each qualifying for supermax, and one star-level free agent acquisition, which was based on filling the biggest needs.

[minimus]

While some financial similarities can be found I dont think that MIN is following DEN under Connelly, because I think more important is set of players archetypes which can be developed into identity, in other words contracts do not show on the floor as much as skills.

When you’re a team like DEN or MIN, who isn’t a free agent destination, you don’t get to choose the skillset of the max players that you get. You find the best players in the draft that have a chance to be stars, regardless of particular skills. Then you find a coach that can turn that talent into wins,

Here, both teams were constructed with three stars that grew from their own draft picks, one each qualifying for supermax, and one star-level free agent acquisition, which was based on filling the biggest needs.

Well, that is correct if your team dont have high draft picks. If you have high draft picks you can also choose at some degree. Thibs preferred Dunn over Murray exactly for his reason: he wanted big, defensive minded PG and did not value Murray. Rosas really WANTED Garland, and drafted Edwards, TOR wanted Barnes because of their all wings experiment, HOU preferred Green over Mobley etc.

I agree that BPA is probably the best way but sometimes team have possibility to choose their way.

[minimus]

One think I want to copy from DEN is their set of plug and play players Braun-Brown-KCP who can versatile enough to just go out and play.

Let say we keep NAW and sign Donte DiVincezo for MLE. How about Edwards-NAW-DDV trio making opponent guards life a nightmare? But what I really hope is that Wendell Moore will develop into such player. Edwards-NAW-Moore!!! MCD-Minott, Towns-Reid.

[shrink]

Let’s do a little thought experiment.

This season, there were 53 contracts over $25 mil. Not all of them are true max deals, but let’s consider them maxes. Players can’t get a max their first four years, so let’s say these maxes represent Years 5-14 (since many of these big contracts are older). This would mean each draft turns out an average of 5 or so kids that will grow into max-worthy players.

These five max-worthy players aren’t perfectly distributed in the top 4 picks. In fact, I would estimate only about half come from the top 5 picks, maybe less. Maybe there is better info out there, but I’d say the distribution comes down like

2: 1-4
1: 5-8
1: 9-18
1: 19-60

If you have a pick on draft day, your goal is to find one of these five max-worthy players. Rarely will you have the choice of two max-worthy players as the next two “best player available” that would allow you to choose for fit. Time and again, I think BPA demonstrates that it is the best strategy in any draft, in any situation.

[frankenwolf]

Let’s do a little thought experiment.

This season, there were 53 contracts over $25 mil. Not all of them are true max deals, but let’s consider them maxes. Players can’t get a max their first four years, so let’s say these maxes represent Years 5-14 (since many of these big contracts are older). This would mean each draft turns out an average of 5 or so kids that will grow into max-worthy players.

These five max-worthy players aren’t perfectly distributed in the top 4 picks. In fact, I would estimate only about half come from the top 5 picks, maybe less. Maybe there is better info out there, but I’d say the distribution comes down like

2: 1-4
1: 5-8
1: 9-18
1: 19-60

If you have a pick on draft day, your goal is to find one of these five max-worthy players. Rarely will you have the choice of two max-worthy players as the next two “best player available” that would allow you to choose for fit. Time and again, I think BPA demonstrates that it is the best strategy in any draft, in any situation.

I agree. A team should never draft for need, unless it matches up with the BPA. If the BPA is similar to a star that you already have, maybe you can trade one or the other, depending on your immediate needs. If we had the #2 pick in this draft, which one would you pick: Scoot or Miller or Henderson?

[shrink]

I’m not a draft expert, but I’d pick Scoot.

When I see these POR trades for #3, I think we are too quick to assume Scoot will be available. If I was CHA, I would pick Scoot at #2, regardless of how he fit.

[Devilzsidewalk]

Hard for me to glean anything from the Denver blueprint - Jokic makes everything work. He can probably turn 85% of the league into a championship rotation player. Probably the hardest skill is high-level shot-creation, and Jokic minimizes the need for that by being such a central hub of their offense with immense gravity. Open shots abound. Guys can get 20 pts off of hard cuts to the rim, and firing up threes off a DHO. On our team, it's gonna be a lot more "ok here's the ball - it's your turn now - good luck!"

But there are opportunities to be had to be sure even without great draft capital. Miami now, and also Brooklyn after the KG/JJ/Pierce days, showed it can be done. I'm hoping TC redeems himself. It'd be a hilariously fun storyline if Minott blew up or something unexpected like that.

[minimus]

I'm hoping TC redeems himself. It'd be a hilariously fun storyline if Minott blew up or something unexpected like that.

Back in DEN days TC drafted and traded Gobert. He did the same with Kessler Walker. Right now I waiting for future MVP to be drafted in second round of 2023

Read on Twitter

[Klomp]

Watch on YouTube