2023-24 preseason

[wolves_89]

They are positive value on their contracts, which pay them next to nothing.

However they are losing trade value every day that their cheap contracts get closer to ending. Plus they are losing trade value relative to similarly-priced players on other teams that get the minutes to develop, and demonstrate their development to potential trade partners.



I’m not following. If traded to another team, they have more value there because that team can get production from them. Value is specific to usefulness, and the 30 different teams have 30 different values for each player. These three guys, particularly Garza, couldn’t be on a team that has less use for him than the Timberwolves.

Btw, Garza in the last pre-season game ate up the opposing starters. Here, he won’t see the court - I bet he’s even behind Miller. I can’t imagine there isn’t a team that would give a future second for him, or he could be needed sweetener for a different deal. Plus Connelly could use his two-way roster spot to take a look at another prospect.

I truly don't get why the Wolves would trade their developmental bigs just so they could play a bit more with another team. Having cheap rotation players is going to be incredibly important for Minnesota, so I would hold onto anybody that has even a chance of getting to that point.

You don’t trade them for nothing.

And you don’t have seven rotation bigs if seven players can’t play in the rotation.

So what are the Wolves getting in return? Trading them for 2nds make no sense whatsoever.

[shrink]

So what are the Wolves getting in return? Trading them for 2nds make no sense whatsoever.

Why would you say that?

Connelly got Leonard Miller with two seconds. Minott was a second.

Besides simply being more flexible draft capital, Connelly could use a second that fit a need - a depth piece at guard may not require three injuries in front to see time. Seconds can also be paid forward to draft a player that might fit the timeline of when we would have that need.

Having seven rotation bigs, in case three get hurt, is just wasting small assets. I don’t spend money to buy a third life preserver to wear in case two of them fail ..the money can be spent on a more likely need, or invested in the future.

[wolves_89]

So what are the Wolves getting in return? Trading them for 2nds make no sense whatsoever.

Why would you say that?

Connelly got Leonard Miller with two seconds. Minott was a second.

Besides simply being more flexible draft capital, Connelly could use a second that fit a need - a depth piece at guard may not require three injuries in front to see time. Seconds can also be paid forward to draft a player that might fit the timeline of when we would have that need.

Having seven rotation bigs, in case three get hurt, is just wasting small assets. I don’t spend money to buy a third life preserver to wear in case two of them fail ..the money can be spent on a more likely need, or invested in the future.

Because 2nd round picks have a fairly low chance of hitting even for a good drafter like Connelly. If you have a couple of guys that look promising you keep them rather than rolling the dice again. Also, the type of guys that the Wolves have been drafting take a couple of years to develop, so trading Minott/Miller for picks would mean restarting that clock. It makes considerably more sense to keep anyone with upside and if they push their way into the rotation look to trade whoever they are replacing.

[shrink]

So what are the Wolves getting in return? Trading them for 2nds make no sense whatsoever.

Why would you say that?

Connelly got Leonard Miller with two seconds. Minott was a second.

Besides simply being more flexible draft capital, Connelly could use a second that fit a need - a depth piece at guard may not require three injuries in front to see time. Seconds can also be paid forward to draft a player that might fit the timeline of when we would have that need.

Having seven rotation bigs, in case three get hurt, is just wasting small assets. I don’t spend money to buy a third life preserver to wear in case two of them fail ..the money can be spent on a more likely need, or invested in the future.

Because 2nd round picks have a fairly low chance of hitting even for a good drafter like Connelly. If you have a couple of guys that look promising you keep them rather than rolling the dice again. Also, the type of guys that the Wolves have been drafting take a couple of years to develop, so trading Minott/Miller for picks would mean restarting that clock. It makes considerably more sense to keep anyone with upside and if they push their way into the rotation look to trade whoever they are replacing.

The problem is that he’s done too well drafting. Because he was so successful with these late picks, he has three players all struggling to get through a single door, simultaneously, so none of them get through. I think Minott, Miller and Garza are all ready to be that young, developmental fifth big. What if one was traded for future picks that were staggered, so a new door opened next year, another the year after, and so on?

As for value, you make my case. Let’s say that “2nd round picks have a low chance of succeeding.” So how many low value second rounders would a team pay for Minott? Three? Four? If they truly have a low chance of succeeding, other teams should be willing to offer multiple seconds, right?

And I think Connelly has demonstrated he has a better chance than most of finding talent in the second round. Yes, every one isn’t going to hit, but he’s hit with many - more than most coaches. This makes the “bag of picks” more valuable to MIN, and the Wolves prospect that won’t see enough playing time here more valuable to the potential trade partner.

[shrink]

Watch on YouTube

[wolves_89]

Why would you say that?

Connelly got Leonard Miller with two seconds. Minott was a second.

Besides simply being more flexible draft capital, Connelly could use a second that fit a need - a depth piece at guard may not require three injuries in front to see time. Seconds can also be paid forward to draft a player that might fit the timeline of when we would have that need.

Having seven rotation bigs, in case three get hurt, is just wasting small assets. I don’t spend money to buy a third life preserver to wear in case two of them fail ..the money can be spent on a more likely need, or invested in the future.

Because 2nd round picks have a fairly low chance of hitting even for a good drafter like Connelly. If you have a couple of guys that look promising you keep them rather than rolling the dice again. Also, the type of guys that the Wolves have been drafting take a couple of years to develop, so trading Minott/Miller for picks would mean restarting that clock. It makes considerably more sense to keep anyone with upside and if they push their way into the rotation look to trade whoever they are replacing.

The problem is that he’s done too well drafting. Because he was so successful with these late picks, he has three players all struggling to get through a single door, simultaneously, so none of them get through. I think Minott, Miller and Garza are all ready to be that young, developmental fifth big. What if one was traded for future picks that were staggered, so a new door opened next year, another the year after, and so on?

As for value, you make my case. Let’s say that “2nd round picks have a low chance of succeeding.” So how many low value second rounders would a team pay for Minott? Three? Four? If they truly have a low chance of succeeding, they should be willing to offer multiple seconds, right?

And I think Connelly has demonstrated he has a better chance than most of finding talent in the second round. Yes, every one isn’t going to hit, but he’s hit with many - more than most coaches. This makes the “bag of picks” more valuable to MIN, and the Wolves prospect that won’t see enough playing time here more valuable to the potential trade partner.

I don't see anyone giving up 3-4 2nds for any of our developmental guys. If given a choice between 1-2 2nds and keeping one of our developmental bigs, I'll pick keeping our guys and it's not a close call. We are going to need these guys starting as soon as next season. I believe there's a pretty good chance one of Minott/Miller is in the rotation in 2024-25 and both are by 2025-26.

[KGdaBom]

So what are the Wolves getting in return? Trading them for 2nds make no sense whatsoever.

Why would you say that?

Connelly got Leonard Miller with two seconds. Minott was a second.

Besides simply being more flexible draft capital, Connelly could use a second that fit a need - a depth piece at guard may not require three injuries in front to see time. Seconds can also be paid forward to draft a player that might fit the timeline of when we would have that need.

Having seven rotation bigs, in case three get hurt, is just wasting small assets. I don’t spend money to buy a third life preserver to wear in case two of them fail ..the money can be spent on a more likely need, or invested in the future.

Shrink I get where you are coming from, but it takes two to tango. Sure if we can get GOOD return in a trade then trade them. If not hold them.

[Klomp]

The only depth guy I see having that kind of value (multiple 2nds) is Miller, and I'm not trading him for anything right now because I personally envision Miller and Reid as our potential starting frontcourt 3-4 years from now.

Our depth is our path to staying competitive. Good young depth allows you to move around older players to allow the young guys to advance in the rotation, not the other way around. We still need to find our future starting PG....future 2nd won't fill that need.

EDIT: I'll add, it's akin to if Gersson Rosas decided to trade rookie Naz Reid in 2019-20 because he had Karl-Anthony Towns, Gorgui Dieng, Noah Vonleh, Robert Covington in front of him in the PF/C depth chart.

[KGdaBom]

Garza, Miller, and Minott are still cheap.

We’re gaining value, still.

They are positive value on their contracts, which pay them next to nothing.

However they are losing trade value every day that their cheap contracts get closer to ending. Plus they are losing trade value relative to similarly-priced players on other teams that get the minutes to develop, and demonstrate their development to potential trade partners.

If the trade value is dropping the longer they're here, doesn't that mean they are more valuable to us than whatever we could recoup in a trade?

I’m not following. If traded to another team, they have more value there because that team can get production from them. Value is specific to usefulness, and the 30 different teams have 30 different values for each player. These three guys, particularly Garza, couldn’t be on a team that has less use for him than the Timberwolves.

Btw, Garza in the last pre-season game ate up the opposing starters. Here, he won’t see the court - I bet he’s even behind Miller. I can’t imagine there isn’t a team that would give a future second for him, or he could be needed sweetener for a different deal. Plus Connelly could use his two-way roster spot to take a look at another prospect.

To me Garza is much too good to trade for a future 2nd rounder.

[KGdaBom]

I'm watching the Spurs vs Warriors and the Warriors have a young big named Trayce Jackson-Davis that is super talented. I'm wondering if he will get any minutes there.

[thinktank]

Why would you say that?

Connelly got Leonard Miller with two seconds. Minott was a second.

Besides simply being more flexible draft capital, Connelly could use a second that fit a need - a depth piece at guard may not require three injuries in front to see time. Seconds can also be paid forward to draft a player that might fit the timeline of when we would have that need.

Having seven rotation bigs, in case three get hurt, is just wasting small assets. I don’t spend money to buy a third life preserver to wear in case two of them fail ..the money can be spent on a more likely need, or invested in the future.

Because 2nd round picks have a fairly low chance of hitting even for a good drafter like Connelly. If you have a couple of guys that look promising you keep them rather than rolling the dice again. Also, the type of guys that the Wolves have been drafting take a couple of years to develop, so trading Minott/Miller for picks would mean restarting that clock. It makes considerably more sense to keep anyone with upside and if they push their way into the rotation look to trade whoever they are replacing.

The problem is that he’s done too well drafting. Because he was so successful with these late picks, he has three players all struggling to get through a single door, simultaneously, so none of them get through. I think Minott, Miller and Garza are all ready to be that young, developmental fifth big. What if one was traded for future picks that were staggered, so a new door opened next year, another the year after, and so on?

As for value, you make my case. Let’s say that “2nd round picks have a low chance of succeeding.” So how many low value second rounders would a team pay for Minott? Three? Four? If they truly have a low chance of succeeding, other teams should be willing to offer multiple seconds, right?

And I think Connelly has demonstrated he has a better chance than most of finding talent in the second round. Yes, every one isn’t going to hit, but he’s hit with many - more than most coaches. This makes the “bag of picks” more valuable to MIN, and the Wolves prospect that won’t see enough playing time here more valuable to the potential trade partner.

“The problem is that he’s done too well drafting”?

Impossible.

[shrink]

Its obviously tongue in cheek. That’s what the paragraph is for.

If you try reading more than one line of a post, or responding with more than one line, you can contribute more to the discussion, regardless of your opinion. I like your posts when you don’t fall back into your RubeChat bit habits.

[Baseline81]

Its obviously tongue in cheek. That’s what the paragraph is for.

If you try reading more than one line of a post, or responding with more than one line, you can contribute more to the discussion, regardless of your opinion. I like your posts when you don’t fall back into your RubeChat bit habits.

But, at the same time, using that line is equivalent to click-bait titles on YouTube videos. You either hook someone in or turn another off.

[shrink]

In most cases, wolves_89 is correct. Teams generally don’t select multiple second round picks and get legitimate rotation projects from all of them (especially all bigs). Then, you only have 1, maybe 2, projects that you can gradually slide into the line up, and watch their playing time grow, year by year. Naz was progressing every year because of OPPORTUNITY that wasn’t divided and sub-divided by having multiple Naz’s that all needed a chance.

However, Connelly managed to add three young players that all have a chance to be legitimate rotation players, if they are given that opportunity. However, ALL THREE won’t have enough opportunity to grow, especially this year with win now MIN investing minutes and dollars in KAT, Rudy, SloMo and Naz. Yes, we will need one, maybe two, if everything goes bad and we dump KAT at the deadline (and don’t get back big prospects in the trade package). But three young bigs, all on virtually the same timeline?

I think to profit from Connelly’s good picks, we need to trade someone. Lately, I think that probably means signing Garza to a Hinkie Special, and packaging him with Wendell Moore Jr before Oct. 31, when we need to decide whether to extend him for 2024-25 at $300,000 over the min. I would look at a future 2nd or 2, a similar level prospect that’s a guard, or maybe a young, third string PG. But the added benefit of culling Garza is that it leaves more minutes for Miller and Minott to feed and grow.

[wolves_89]

I think to profit from Connelly’s good picks, we need to trade someone. Lately, I think that probably means signing Garza to a Hinkie Special, and packaging him with Wendell Moore Jr before Oct. 31, when we need to decide whether to extend him for 2024-25 at $300,000 over the min. I would look at a future 2nd or 2, a similar level prospect that’s a guard, or maybe a young, third string PG. But the added benefit of culling Garza is that it leaves more minutes for Miller and Minott to feed and grow.

I'm skeptical that Garza or Moore would have any trade value. No team in the NBA was willing to offer Garza a minimum regular contract, so I'm doubtful that a team would now be willing to give up a pick to have him on a minimum deal. As for Moore, I'm not sure many teams would be interested in picking up his 2024-25 option, meaning if he doesn't show something soon the Wolves might have to pay a pick to move him (assuming we pick up the option). Getting a pick for one or both seems like a long shot.

[shrink]

I think to profit from Connelly’s good picks, we need to trade someone. Lately, I think that probably means signing Garza to a Hinkie Special, and packaging him with Wendell Moore Jr before Oct. 31, when we need to decide whether to extend him for 2024-25 at $300,000 over the min. I would look at a future 2nd or 2, a similar level prospect that’s a guard, or maybe a young, third string PG. But the added benefit of culling Garza is that it leaves more minutes for Miller and Minott to feed and grow.

I'm skeptical that Garza or Moore would have any trade value. No team in the NBA was willing to offer Garza a minimum regular contract, so I'm doubtful that a team would now be willing to give up a pick to have him on a minimum deal. As for Moore, I'm not sure many teams would be interested in picking up his 2024-25 option, meaning if he doesn't show something soon the Wolves might have to pay a pick to move him (assuming we pick up the option). Getting a pick for one or both seems like a long shot.

You could be right. I think GM’s have been rightfully skeptical that Garza can succeed at the NBA game, but he has changed his body and shown more production under MIN’s two-way. Has he convinced anyone? And I don’t put much value in Moore, but his extra year is only $300,000 more than the vet min, he’s young, he’s a floor-raiser, and he has a Duke pedigree. Maybe he’s just a matching salary, but at a vet min salary, you don’t have to give a pick to get off of him - top-heavy teams often look for vet min players to reach roster limits. I don’t know about specific needs, but teams built like LAL or PHX are always looking for cheap insurance guys.

[wolves_89]

I think to profit from Connelly’s good picks, we need to trade someone. Lately, I think that probably means signing Garza to a Hinkie Special, and packaging him with Wendell Moore Jr before Oct. 31, when we need to decide whether to extend him for 2024-25 at $300,000 over the min. I would look at a future 2nd or 2, a similar level prospect that’s a guard, or maybe a young, third string PG. But the added benefit of culling Garza is that it leaves more minutes for Miller and Minott to feed and grow.

I'm skeptical that Garza or Moore would have any trade value. No team in the NBA was willing to offer Garza a minimum regular contract, so I'm doubtful that a team would now be willing to give up a pick to have him on a minimum deal. As for Moore, I'm not sure many teams would be interested in picking up his 2024-25 option, meaning if he doesn't show something soon the Wolves might have to pay a pick to move him (assuming we pick up the option). Getting a pick for one or both seems like a long shot.

You could be right. I think GM’s have been rightfully skeptical that Garza can succeed at the NBA game, but he has changed his body and shown more production under MIN’s two-way. Has he convinced anyone? And I don’t put much value in Moore, but his extra year is only $300,000 more than the vet min, he’s young, he’s a floor-raiser, and he has a Duke pedigree. Maybe he’s just a matching salary, but at a vet min salary, you don’t have to give a pick to get off of him - top-heavy teams often look for vet min players to reach roster limits. I don’t know about specific needs, but teams built like LAL or PHX are always looking for cheap insurance guys.

For Moore, the pick to move him would be needed if the Wolves pick up his option and then look to trade him before this season's trade deadline (meaning the acquiring team would have to pay him for ~1.5 years). If we don't pick up his option, he could be used as salary filler.

[shrink]

I'm skeptical that Garza or Moore would have any trade value. No team in the NBA was willing to offer Garza a minimum regular contract, so I'm doubtful that a team would now be willing to give up a pick to have him on a minimum deal. As for Moore, I'm not sure many teams would be interested in picking up his 2024-25 option, meaning if he doesn't show something soon the Wolves might have to pay a pick to move him (assuming we pick up the option). Getting a pick for one or both seems like a long shot.

You could be right. I think GM’s have been rightfully skeptical that Garza can succeed at the NBA game, but he has changed his body and shown more production under MIN’s two-way. Has he convinced anyone? And I don’t put much value in Moore, but his extra year is only $300,000 more than the vet min, he’s young, he’s a floor-raiser, and he has a Duke pedigree. Maybe he’s just a matching salary, but at a vet min salary, you don’t have to give a pick to get off of him - top-heavy teams often look for vet min players to reach roster limits. I don’t know about specific needs, but teams built like LAL or PHX are always looking for cheap insurance guys.

For Moore the pick to move him would be needed if the Wolves pick up his option and then look to trade him before this season's trade deadline (meaning the acquiring team would have to pay him for ~1.5 years). If we don't pick up his option, he could be used as salary filler.

I would agree if he was paid $4+ mil next year. If he’s basically the minimum, that’s fine.

[wolves_89]

You could be right. I think GM’s have been rightfully skeptical that Garza can succeed at the NBA game, but he has changed his body and shown more production under MIN’s two-way. Has he convinced anyone? And I don’t put much value in Moore, but his extra year is only $300,000 more than the vet min, he’s young, he’s a floor-raiser, and he has a Duke pedigree. Maybe he’s just a matching salary, but at a vet min salary, you don’t have to give a pick to get off of him - top-heavy teams often look for vet min players to reach roster limits. I don’t know about specific needs, but teams built like LAL or PHX are always looking for cheap insurance guys.

For Moore the pick to move him would be needed if the Wolves pick up his option and then look to trade him before this season's trade deadline (meaning the acquiring team would have to pay him for ~1.5 years). If we don't pick up his option, he could be used as salary filler.

I would agree if he was paid $4+ mil next year. If he’s basically the minimum, that’s fine.

It's fine when he expires at the end of the year, when his contract impacts the following season it's not.

[TimberKat]

It doesn't make sense to hold on to all four of Naz, Miller, Minott, and Garza in the long run, if we assume they will be rotation players in the NBA. Ideally trade one of them for PG of equal or greater value (but not second round picks, you don't want to trade a winning lottery ticket for less than three future lottery tickets as you may not win). Maybe POR would go for a Naz+Moore+JMcL+Brown for Borgdon. or Miller+KA+Brown+JMcL+Moore for Borgdon. I don't want to trade Conley and on the fence if we need to throw in both Naz + Miller. It depends on how well Milton and JMcL handles the backup PG role.