2023 Free Agency

[shrink]

Are any of the new 260Million deals actually 260Million deals already?

No. Free Agency began June 30th, but we are in a moratorium until June 6th.

Players and teams can agree in principle, but the contracts can’t be signed until June 6th

[shrink]

Our boards lately are just awful, so I’m going to take a break.

If you have a CBA question, feel free to pm me, if someone else can’t answer it first.

[Klomp]

Even for people that hate the Gobert deal that makes the Gobert deal look a lot better.

It's as many of us said at the time, the players leaving were not the issue, but rather the number of picks involved -- removed the team's flexibility going forward.

Despite a perceived lack of flexibility, Connelly has shown he can work his way up and down the draft board pretty well. Part of why I've never been too worried about it.

[Baseline81]

Despite a perceived lack of flexibility, Connelly has shown he can work his way up and down the draft board pretty well. Part of why I've never been too worried about it.

Not sure you understand the type of flexibility myself and others mean. It's to use them in trades for players (e.g. Gobert).

[KGdaBom]

Are any of the new 260Million deals actually 260Million deals already?

No. Free Agency began June 30th, but we are in a moratorium until June 6th.

Players and teams can agree in principle, but the contracts can’t be signed until June 6th

Not what I meant. Ant is being reported to have signed for 5 years $260 Million. In reality he only potentially can get that. As it stands now it's $216 Million.

[Klomp]

Despite a perceived lack of flexibility, Connelly has shown he can work his way up and down the draft board pretty well. Part of why I've never been too worried about it.

Not sure you understand the type of flexibility myself and others mean. It's to use them in trades for players (e.g. Gobert).

There's no difference between using picks to acquire other picks or to acquire players. By making the Russell deal at the deadline, he gained that flexibility to trade picks which wound up helping them move up the draft board for Miller.

I know it's easy to get hung up on our own picks which yes we traded away, but you're criticizing Connelly for doing exactly what you wish he had the ability to do. He had the flexibility to trade picks for a player and he did so.

[Slim Tubby]

Our boards lately are just awful, so I’m going to take a break.

If you have a CBA question, feel free to pm me, if someone else can’t answer it first.

I think I'll join you on that hiatus away from our boards for a while. They've become insufferable the last couple of months. I can get my fill of Wolves hate on the General and T&T boards any time that I want.

[Klomp]

Are any of the new 260Million deals actually 260Million deals already?

No. Free Agency began June 30th, but we are in a moratorium until June 6th.

Players and teams can agree in principle, but the contracts can’t be signed until June 6th

Not what I meant. Ant is being reported to have signed for 5 years $260 Million. In reality he only potentially can get that. As it stands now it's $216 Million.

Basically, he needs to make all-NBA this upcoming season. Or win MVP or DPOY.

[Slim Tubby]

Despite a perceived lack of flexibility, Connelly has shown he can work his way up and down the draft board pretty well. Part of why I've never been too worried about it.

Not sure you understand the type of flexibility myself and others mean. It's to use them in trades for players (e.g. Gobert).

There's no difference between using picks to acquire other picks or to acquire players. By making the Russell deal at the deadline, he gained that flexibility to trade picks which wound up helping them move up the draft board for Miller.

I know it's easy to get hung up on our own picks which yes we traded away, but you're criticizing Connelly for doing exactly what you wish he had the ability to do. He had the flexibility to trade picks for a player and he did so.

The inability for some posters to comprehend your valid point is absolutely mind boggling to me. It's like ordering a cheese-only pizza in order to save money and then bitch about the pizza place when it's delivered with no toppings.

[Baseline81]

There's no difference between using picks to acquire other picks or to acquire players. By making the Russell deal at the deadline, he gained that flexibility to trade picks which wound up helping them move up the draft board for Miller.

I know it's easy to get hung up on our own picks which yes we traded away, but you're criticizing Connelly for doing exactly what you wish he had the ability to do. He had the flexibility to trade picks for a player and he did so.

You referenced the purchase (using two future second round picks) to acquire a second round pick. That's quite a bit different than tossing out four future first round picks along with a future pick swap. We no longer have the draft capital to do such a move. End of.

[Klomp]

There's no difference between using picks to acquire other picks or to acquire players. By making the Russell deal at the deadline, he gained that flexibility to trade picks which wound up helping them move up the draft board for Miller.

I know it's easy to get hung up on our own picks which yes we traded away, but you're criticizing Connelly for doing exactly what you wish he had the ability to do. He had the flexibility to trade picks for a player and he did so.

You referenced the purchase (using two future second round picks) to acquire a second round pick. That's quite a bit different than tossing out four future first round picks along with a future pick swap. We no longer have the draft capital to do such a move. End of.

My second paragraph was actually about the Gobert trade. People criticize Connelly for doing exactly what you wish he had the ability to do....trade a boatload of 1st round picks for a very good player. He had the flexibility to trade picks for a player and he did so.

[Baseline81]

My second paragraph was actually about the Gobert trade. People criticize Connelly for doing exactly what you wish he had the ability to do....trade a boatload of 1st round picks for a very good player. He had the flexibility to trade picks for a player and he did so.

I, and others, didn't criticize him for using the flexibility, but rather two reasons. One, Gobert was the wrong player to go all-in on. I have explained myself quite a few times as to why and won't rehash it again. And two, he flat-out overpaid, which everyone, Wolves fan or otherwise, agreed at the time of the trade.

[KGdaBom]

Our boards lately are just awful, so I’m going to take a break.

If you have a CBA question, feel free to pm me, if someone else can’t answer it first.

I think I'll join you on that hiatus away from our boards for a while. They've become insufferable the last couple of months. I can get my fill of Wolves hate on the General and T&T boards any time that I want.

There sure is a lot of Wolves hate from Wolves fans. It is depressing.

[KGdaBom]

No. Free Agency began June 30th, but we are in a moratorium until June 6th.

Players and teams can agree in principle, but the contracts can’t be signed until June 6th

Not what I meant. Ant is being reported to have signed for 5 years $260 Million. In reality he only potentially can get that. As it stands now it's $216 Million.

Basically, he needs to make all-NBA this upcoming season. Or win MVP or DPOY.

Yeah I knew that. Are all of the other supposed 5 year 260 Million contracts the same or have any of them met the $260 Million criteria already?

[TimberKat]

Not what I meant. Ant is being reported to have signed for 5 years $260 Million. In reality he only potentially can get that. As it stands now it's $216 Million.

Basically, he needs to make all-NBA this upcoming season. Or win MVP or DPOY.

Yeah I knew that. Are all of the other supposed 5 year 260 Million contracts the same or have any of them met the $260 Million criteria already?

The forth years guys are Edwards and Ball. They both need All NBA next year to get Supermax. J Brown is the next Supermax 8th year guy. I think he already qualified. Booker and Towns already signed Supermax and kicks in 24/25. Fox missed his chances and waiting for next round. SGA is on a max. JA missed his because he didn't make All NBA

I personally don't like the Supermax rules. I think they should make it must be two years or more on NBA 1st or 2nd team (don't count third team). Towns and Beal squeezed in due to position based selection which will change this year. Ant and Ball may get lucky because of the one year requirement. If there is eventually be 50 max contracts in the NBA, you want a system that only has 10 or 12 supermax. Also, reward year in, year out consistent performers not one hit wonders. I like my yearly team assign bonus method better.

[Wolves21]

Our boards lately are just awful, so I’m going to take a break.

If you have a CBA question, feel free to pm me, if someone else can’t answer it first.

I think I'll join you on that hiatus away from our boards for a while. They've become insufferable the last couple of months. I can get my fill of Wolves hate on the General and T&T boards any time that I want.

There sure is a lot of Wolves hate from Wolves fans. It is depressing.

I wouldn't say hate,people have different view points on players i.e. Towns & Gobert and the teams outlook but would safely say all and I mean all us Wolves fans in the end just want the team to be good and to finally win a title. Now how we get their is up to a debate which I think is the whole point in even posting on a site like this.

[jscott]

I think I'll join you on that hiatus away from our boards for a while. They've become insufferable the last couple of months. I can get my fill of Wolves hate on the General and T&T boards any time that I want.

There sure is a lot of Wolves hate from Wolves fans. It is depressing.

I wouldn't say hate,people have different view points on players i.e. Towns & Gobert and the teams outlook but would safely say all and I mean all us Wolves fans in the end just want the team to be good and to finally win a title. Now how we get their is up to a debate which I think is the whole point in even posting on a site like this.

Yeah, for sure.

I’d say it’s probably not the debate that is grating but rather how the debate is conducted. It’s possible to disagree and have tact - maybe even achieve a little more understanding even - but it seems like some people like to dig their heels in and get a bit edgy about it.

[BlacJacMac]

I personally don't like the Supermax rules. I think they should make it must be two years or more on NBA 1st or 2nd team (don't count third team). Towns and Beal squeezed in due to position based selection which will change this year. Ant and Ball may get lucky because of the one year requirement. If there is eventually be 50 max contracts in the NBA, you want a system that only has 10 or 12 supermax. Also, reward year in, year out consistent performers not one hit wonders. I like my yearly team assign bonus method better.

It's a weird concept. You want your players to do well and be rewarded, but you don't want them to do too well to make the extra money.

Contracts, in a salary capped world, should not be flexible. It seems like it would be more fair if the contract you sign is what your cap number is and will be. And if you hit a Supermax bonus, that should be paid to you, but outside of the cap structure.

As it stands now, the Supermax rule benefits the player and penalizes the team. Having the bonus be "uncapped" would solve that problem.

Now obviously, this can only apply to the Supermax. Otherwise teams would fill contracts with relatively easy to hit bonuses to circumvent the cap.

[Klomp]

Contracts, in a salary capped world, should not be flexible. It seems like it would be more fair if the contract you sign is what your cap number is and will be. And if you hit a Supermax bonus, that should be paid to you, but outside of the cap structure.

As it stands now, the Supermax rule benefits the player and penalizes the team. Having the bonus be "uncapped" would solve that problem.

Now obviously, this can only apply to the Supermax. Otherwise teams would fill contracts with relatively easy to hit bonuses to circumvent the cap.

It's only a thing because rookie extensions are signed a year early. The contract isn't really flexible. They are based on what happens during the life of the rookie contract, which is why it feels flexible.

[BlacJacMac]

Contracts, in a salary capped world, should not be flexible. It seems like it would be more fair if the contract you sign is what your cap number is and will be. And if you hit a Supermax bonus, that should be paid to you, but outside of the cap structure.

As it stands now, the Supermax rule benefits the player and penalizes the team. Having the bonus be "uncapped" would solve that problem.

Now obviously, this can only apply to the Supermax. Otherwise teams would fill contracts with relatively easy to hit bonuses to circumvent the cap.

It's only a thing because rookie extensions are signed a year early. The contract isn't really flexible. They are based on what happens during the life of the rookie contract, which is why it feels flexible.

I'm just saying there is a big difference between 216 and 260. Especially when making your budget.