How do we feel about the Rudy Gobert trade now?

[TimberKat]

I still think that 80% of what Gobert brings can be replicated by a player payed a third of what Gobert is played. The most underrated part of the trade was getting Conley in the deal and him being good in his late 30s.

Sure, that 20% you didn't get maybe translated to 7 wins. I could give 10% of Gobert providers at 1% of his salary. Am I a better value now?

[Los_29]

Great trade if Minnesota can compete for the next 3-4 years. In fact, Utah would be the losers of this trade if all they get out of it are late FRPs and Kessler.

[KodiakBear]

Still not a fan. You've got a budding 22 yr old superstar and now very little flexibility moving forward. With a little better asset management, this could have been a top team for 10+ years.

You blindly assume we won’t be and that’s a logical flaw.

Yeah why exactly won't Minnesota be an elite team for a long time? Even if Gobert falls off soon, he is only on the books for 2 more years. With all that free cap space you'll easily be able to attract talent to play with Edwards and KAT. Minnesota also has shown to be a competent front office. The other two guys they got in a trade with the Jazz have done really well for them. I like Conley, but wasn't sad to see him leave Utah because of his age and the Jazz attempting to rebuild, but losing Alexander-Walker stings a bit.

[Bergmaniac]

Jokic himself said that the Wolves were specifically built to build the Nuggets and mentioned having "two first team all-defence players" as a big part of why they succeeded at it, but hey, why listen to him, what does he know...

When the Wolves made the trade, Warriors were defending champions...again, this narrative that Wolves made the trade to counter Nuggets doesn't make any kinda sense. Wolves were coming off a tough loss vs Grizzlies in playoffs when they made Gobert trade. Warriors won the title. Wolves problem in Grizzlies series was rebounding which was the reason they lost the series..Wolves were a terrible rebounding team and it was also getting obvious that KAT might be better suited as a 4 rather than 5 playing drop coverage. That was a major reason for making the Gobert trade..to fix rebounding issues, move KAT to 4.

Jokic had just become 2 time MVP back then and was putting up great numbers in the playoffs while the Warriors core was quite old and unlikely to challenge for much longer. And Murray obviously wouldn't stay injured forever. It really isn't that much of a stretch to think that being better prepared to deal with Jokic was a significant part of the reasoning for the Gobert trade.

[TimberKat]

No thanks to Gobert. You could have put a literal statue in front of Jokic and it would have been no less ineffective than Gobert was.

It didn’t matter.

Each player has a strength. Learn to appreciate them all.

What strength? His only purported "strength" has been massively overblown. Gobert is a "great" defender in the same way that Russell Westbrook is a "great" three-point shooter.

Are you guys really taking these comments seriously?

[KodiakBear]

It didn’t matter.

Each player has a strength. Learn to appreciate them all.

What strength? His only purported "strength" has been massively overblown. Gobert is a "great" defender in the same way that Russell Westbrook is a "great" three-point shooter.

Are you guys really taking these comments seriously?

I hope nobody is, but hey if people want to believe the 4x defensive player of the year is bad at defense they are free to be stupid. There are people that believe OJ was innocent and that we didn't land on the moon so why not this?

[Wingy]

Can’t plan to hit on the Jokics.

The Currys don’t apply because I don’t think we’ll ever be in the lotto with Ant.

You’re telling that to a Bulls fan. Remember DRose? Ant could also decide to leave if the team falls off as Gobert ages, someone else might get injured and leave him fighting mostly alone. Lebron and KD normalized stars jumping ship.

Agree re:Jokic type, but fair or unfair, that’s what many people will judge on, especially if they get drafted anywhere near the future Utah picks.

[F Saunders]

Without the Gobert trade, Wolves are likely a treadmill team that loses the play-in last year, and has a similar fate this year. If that were to have happened, the narrative is "Can't win with Towns" & "Ant isn't staying in MN"

So from a Timberwolves perspective it's either:

1) Host the WCF, and get Ant, KAT, Jaden, Naz much more postseason experience, or
2) Listen to why they need to trade KAT and Ant all offseason, but still have 2027 & 2029 draft picks

Both teams can win a trade. I can't speak for Utah here, but the trade was definitely a win and worth it for MN.

[jack612]

I still think that 80% of what Gobert brings can be replicated by a player payed a third of what Gobert is played.

I think you're wrong because if it were that easy and cheap to make a move that would have such a big impact, everyone would be doing it.

[thinktank]

Can’t plan to hit on the Jokics.

The Currys don’t apply because I don’t think we’ll ever be in the lotto with Ant.

You’re telling that to a Bulls fan. Remember DRose? Ant could also decide to leave if the team falls off as Gobert ages, someone else might get injured and leave him fighting mostly alone. Lebron and KD normalized stars jumping ship.

Agree re:Jokic type, but fair or unfair, that’s what many people will judge on, especially if they get drafted anywhere near the future Utah picks.

Ant could leave, but you can't assume that will happen.

A lot of times, in good franchises with good coaches and GMs (think Spurs, as crazy as it sounds to have Spurs and Wolves in the same sentence), the stars stay.

[celtxman]

I don't think anyone else was ever going to pay what the Wolves paid for him especially that Goberts contract could be an absolute disaster on the wrong team. Utah did extraordinary with that trade. The Wolves may win it all with Gobert. It's complicated. What if the Wolves used all of these assets in another direction?
The question is how do we feel about it. I feel that with the emergence of Reid, McDaniels and of course Edwards, that in some ways Gobert is along for the ride. I'm not saying he isn't a big time defensive contributor, I'm saying they gave up a lot and he's overpaid.

[KodiakBear]

Can’t plan to hit on the Jokics.

The Currys don’t apply because I don’t think we’ll ever be in the lotto with Ant.

You’re telling that to a Bulls fan. Remember DRose? Ant could also decide to leave if the team falls off as Gobert ages, someone else might get injured and leave him fighting mostly alone. Lebron and KD normalized stars jumping ship.

Agree re:Jokic type, but fair or unfair, that’s what many people will judge on, especially if they get drafted anywhere near the future Utah picks.

Ant could leave, but you can't assume that will happen.

A lot of times, in good franchises with good coaches and GMs (think Spurs, as crazy as it sounds to have Spurs and Wolves in the same sentence), the stars stay.

Yeah as long as he has a great supporting cast he'll stay. If they fall off, he could bolt to Atlanta.

[Billl]

Still not a fan. You've got a budding 22 yr old superstar and now very little flexibility moving forward. With a little better asset management, this could have been a top team for 10+ years.

You blindly assume we won’t be and that’s a logical flaw.

Yeah why exactly won't Minnesota be an elite team for a long time? Even if Gobert falls off soon, he is only on the books for 2 more years. With all that free cap space you'll easily be able to attract talent to play with Edwards and KAT. Minnesota also has shown to be a competent front office. The other two guys they got in a trade with the Jazz have done really well for them. I like Conley, but wasn't sad to see him leave Utah because of his age and the Jazz attempting to rebuild, but losing Alexander-Walker stings a bit.

They won't have significant cap space. They are already at $126mil with just KAT, ANT and Jaden and another $22 mil for a Reid cap hold/extension. And they sent off all the pics so they won't have a bunch of cheap guys coming in to fill out the roster.

It's mostly the picks though. You can operate over the cap. It's hard to operate over the cap without pick flexibility. The normal trade formula for a team trying to contend is expiring+draft asset for current contributor. You have to keep replenishing talent because other teams poach all your role players in free agency.

[Edrees]

They could have had gobert for one less pick. Theyd be even better than they are now with that extra assett for flexibility to improve.

Wrong. The price was the price.

They could have had Gobert for 2 less picks. When does it stop.

They could have had Gobert for what they spent AND needed McDaniels in the deal.

Who was offering this type of value for Gobert?

[Papi_swav]

Still an overpay but not a massive overpay that it was at the time of the trade. They could of done it with 2 less picks like the 2029 one and maybe the pick swap.

No, they couldn't have. It's not like the Wolves' first offer was 4 FRP and the Jazz were snickering and saying "sweet." This was probably as low as Danny Ainge could've been talked down to. They offer less and the Jazz just trade him someplace else.

who was the other team willing to pay more than that?

[Statlanta]

It was a big gamble especially since he was punching his teammate Kyle Anderson last year.

Lucky they got Conley to calm the entire team down and pass him the ball sometimes.

[Harry Garris]

I've been a defender of the Rudy Gobert trade from day 1, I thought his addition would turn the Wolves into an elite defense and legitimate championship contenders and all the assets they gave up were worth the cost.

It took a little bit longer than I expected it to but here we are.

Also I can't stand the Bill Simmons fence sitting take where he tries to mask the reality that he had one of the most insanely over reactionary takes I've ever heard, calling the Rudy Gobert trade arguably the worst trade in NBA history and all of that nonsense. Now he couches it by saying the Wolves "still gave up too much".

No, the Wolves didn't give up too much. They gave up Jarred Vanderbilt, Pat Bev, Malik Beasley, Walker Kessler, and what are going to be 4 late first round picks. They didn't give up an all star caliber player or even a good pick that has a high likelihood of becoming an all star player. They gave up some ok role players.

In my opinion you can give up any number of low end rotation pieces and as long as you can still fill out a lineup around your stars, it doesn't matter. Rotation players are semi-replaceable, and the Wolves have replaced the guys that they lost.

[ShootersShoot]

I still think that 80% of what Gobert brings can be replicated by a player payed a third of what Gobert is played. The most underrated part of the trade was getting Conley in the deal and him being good in his late 30s.

Sure, that 20% you didn't get maybe translated to 7 wins. I could give 10% of Gobert providers at 1% of his salary. Am I a better value now?

That's like saying Demar Derozan is 80% of Michael Jordan..Nope you arent getting michael jordan but a guy with more flaws and not as good. I do think the wolves would still be a good team without Rudy as they won 46 games two seasons ago without him, but having that elite front court rotation is what makes the wolves so dangerous imo.

[Wolveswin]

They could have had gobert for one less pick. Theyd be even better than they are now with that extra assett for flexibility to improve.

Wrong. The price was the price.

They could have had Gobert for 2 less picks. When does it stop.

They could have had Gobert for what they spent AND needed McDaniels in the deal.

Who was offering this type of value for Gobert?

Who knows. You sure don’t. I sure don’t. Not anywhere close to the point.

[Johnny Bball]

Still is a monstrous overpay that no other team would have been close to