Don't speed it up: Wolves sign Slo-Mo Kyle Anderson (2yr/$18M)

[winforlose]

Just so I understand. Had we signed Kyle to 9/27 and traded him in February ..

We couldn’t extend him because you can only extend three year deals, and only two years after the date the player signed. Anderson signed a two year deal July 8, 2022.

Not extend, sign him to a 9/27 using bird rights. I am trying to figure out if we lost something by doing it now rather than January or February.

[BlacJacMac]

So your idea is to sign him with the sole intent of trading him in January or February?

What if he’s playing great at that point? Do you risk disrupting the team and chemistry by salary dumping him? Do you keep him and just pay the 50M extra?

Conversely what if he falls on his face and no one wants him? It’s going to cost at least one first round pick to dump the remainder of his contract. And we don’t have that.

Also doing it now gives SloMo the ability to pick where he wants to go. He likely loses that under your plan.

It feels like a ton of risk for not enough reward.

[winforlose]

So your idea is to sign him with the sole intent of trading him in January or February?

What if he’s playing great at that point? Do you risk disrupting the team and chemistry by salary dumping him? Do you keep him and just pay the 50M extra?

Conversely what if he falls on his face and no one wants him? It’s going to cost at least one first round pick to dump the remainder of his contract. And we don’t have that.

Also doing it now gives SloMo the ability to pick where he wants to go. He likely loses that under your plan.

It feels like a ton of risk for not enough reward.

If you really think no team would trade for Kyle at 9 mil and that he has no value as either an 8th man or an injury reserve than you are correct. This move suggests the contrary.

[BlacJacMac]

So your idea is to sign him with the sole intent of trading him in January or February?

What if he’s playing great at that point? Do you risk disrupting the team and chemistry by salary dumping him? Do you keep him and just pay the 50M extra?

Conversely what if he falls on his face and no one wants him? It’s going to cost at least one first round pick to dump the remainder of his contract. And we don’t have that.

Also doing it now gives SloMo the ability to pick where he wants to go. He likely loses that under your plan.

It feels like a ton of risk for not enough reward.

If you really think no team would trade for Kyle at 9 mil and that he has no value as either an 8th man or an injury reserve than you are correct. This move suggests the contrary.

I’m just pointing out that’s it’s not the slam dunk you presented. There are serious risks if he over or underperforms.

[winforlose]

So your idea is to sign him with the sole intent of trading him in January or February?

What if he’s playing great at that point? Do you risk disrupting the team and chemistry by salary dumping him? Do you keep him and just pay the 50M extra?

Conversely what if he falls on his face and no one wants him? It’s going to cost at least one first round pick to dump the remainder of his contract. And we don’t have that.

Also doing it now gives SloMo the ability to pick where he wants to go. He likely loses that under your plan.

It feels like a ton of risk for not enough reward.

If you really think no team would trade for Kyle at 9 mil and that he has no value as either an 8th man or an injury reserve than you are correct. This move suggests the contrary.

I’m just pointing out that’s it’s not the slam dunk you presented. There are serious risks if he over or underperforms.

Over performing not so much, we could just keep him and pay him, or get more assets in the trade. Underperforming, maybe but he is not exactly a closed book for most teams. The real risk is injury.

[Nick K]

I agree, he tweeted that in a confusing way. Looking at his summary rules tweet, I think he is trying to say that teams over the second apron can create and use TPE’s from trades made this season, but they can’t use them if they generated them by sign-and-trading their own player.

For example, if we traded Towns into another team’s cap space, we could use that TPE. But we can’t use a TPE created from a player we signed-and-traded, like Kyle.

Thanks shrink. So basically we're effed! Any ideas what we do about a backup 3rd string PG?

They can offer Jordan MacLaughlin more than the vet min, and he should take it. Good deal for us too, maintaining our continuity, but he’s quite limited and you have to pray his three point shot continues to fall.

Here’s a list of some free agent PGs. I don’t know who would come here to play for the minimum, but that’s all we can offer.

Tyus Jones. (Too expensive)
Spencer Dinwiddie
Kyle Lowry
Patrick Beverley
Cam Payne
Markelle Fultz
Dennis Smith Jr
Jordan Goodwin (MEM)
Killian Hayes
Malachi Flynn
Patty Mills
Corey Joseph
Ish Smith

I'm not crazy about anybody there we can afford. I like Dinwiddie but I don't know if we can afford him.

Yikes, Daishen Nix who has been with us on a two-way might be our best option. Yikes a 2nd time.

Corey Joseph? yikes!

[Domejandro]

Since people are confused…

1. Sign and trades do not generate TPE’s.
2. Golden State had no other pathway to signing him beyond a sign-and-trade. This deal hard caps them at the First Apron.
3. This deal is largely a way to treat Kyle Anderson right and allow him to sign with the team that he wanted to go to.
4. Minnesota decided that they could not afford bringing Kyle Anderson back at this price (welcome to the reality of the new CBA).
5. Getting a second round pick swap and cash for functionally doing absolutely nothing is obviously worthwhile (especially while generating good will with an outgoing player).
6. It is entirely possible that Kyle Anderson wanted to leave, you can’t hold an unrestricted free agent hostage.

All of the discussion around usable TPE’s is wrong, and the idea that the Minnesota Timberwolves could afford to just sign Kyle now and trade him later is not appropriately appreciating the new reality of the Second Apron (Minnesota cannot afford that financial risk for a Kyle Anderson level player).

[Loaf_of_bread]

We're better off without him for that contract.

[winforlose]

Since people are confused…

1. Sign and trades do not generate TPE’s.
2. Golden State had no other pathway to signing him beyond a sign-and-trade. This deal hard caps them at the First Apron.
3. This deal is largely a way to treat Kyle Anderson right and allow him to sign with the team that he wanted to go to.
4. Minnesota decided that they could not afford bringing Kyle Anderson back at this price (welcome to the reality of the new CBA).
5. Getting a second round pick swap and cash for functionally doing absolutely nothing is obviously worthwhile (especially while generating good will with an outgoing player).
6. It is entirely possible that Kyle Anderson wanted to leave, you can’t hold an unrestricted free agent hostage.

All of the discussion around usable TPE’s is wrong, and the idea that the Minnesota Timberwolves could afford to just sign Kyle now and trade him later is not appropriately appreciating the new reality of the Second Apron (Minnesota cannot afford that financial risk for a Kyle Anderson level player).

1. Thank you for clearing that up, I really was confused.

2. I agree 1-5 and think that anything that makes players look favorably upon an organization is its own reward. Plus GSW might do us a similar type favor in the future. Good relationships matter.

3. I disagree on 6 only to the extent that bird rights are how teams add salary. The simple fact is ownership is trying to cut costs when they should be INCREASING spending and paying the tax. Kyle could have turned into two reasonable contract role players, or 1 rotation worthy player who was cheaper than him. Injury could mean eating the contract this year for nothing, and from ownerships vantage point that would suck. But losing Kyle and Monte for nothing is very bad because we cannot replace them for anything other than minimums. It is step in the wrong direction instead of the right one. But, it seems that either new ownership, Glen, or both don’t want to or don’t have the money and therefore our team will continue to miss opportunities.

[shrink]

Just so I understand. Had we signed Kyle to 9/27 and traded him in February ..

We couldn’t extend him because you can only extend three year deals, and only two years after the date the player signed. Anderson signed a two year deal July 8, 2022.

Not extend, sign him to a 9/27 using bird rights. I am trying to figure out if we lost something by doing it now rather than January or February.

Sorry, my reading skills have been really bad today, as several of my recent posts have shown.

Yes, I agree with you, but 9/27 would feel too risky for me, and I would have seen if Kyle would have come back for no more than $5.168, which is the tax-payers MLE. You’d have to explain to Anderson that, like any player, you could definitely be traded, but we’ll guarantee you’re here until February. I think with the lower salary, he would be tradeable for cap space, and perhaps net a little profit. It’s also possible that ownership would see he’s doing so well, they’d be willing to eat more lux taxes later.

So every time we have a new CBA, some smart GM finds a loophole, like Connelly did to add salary to a team over the second apron. I think a loophole also exists with timing luxury tax after the season. For example, people say signing Anderson at $9 mil would cost the Wolves $35 mil (not sure of the number), but that’s only true if that salary is on the books at the end of the season. Keep him for 2/3rds of the season, and he cost you $6 mil and no lux taxes. The truth is, every roster slot carries the potential to be filled with a player that has positive trade value, that you could potentially use in the regular season at a fair price (and provide injury insurance for other players), and maybe gain you an asset if dealt before the trade deadline. This may be like a dangerous hot potato, and MIN has used most of its assets to pay to dump a bad contract, but using those slots on good value deals helps in the regular season, and may help monetize Connelly’s ability to spot talent.

[shrink]

Since people are confused…

1. Sign and trades do not generate TPE’s.

Sign-and-trades certainly generate TPE’s, and is well used mechanism, famously used with Durant to BRK.

I think you may mean that S&T’s don’t generate TPE’s for teams over the second apron. I have heard it both ways, and this test case should determine how the NBA will treat them.

[winforlose]

We couldn’t extend him because you can only extend three year deals, and only two years after the date the player signed. Anderson signed a two year deal July 8, 2022.

Not extend, sign him to a 9/27 using bird rights. I am trying to figure out if we lost something by doing it now rather than January or February.

Sorry, my reading skills have been really bad today, as several of my recent posts have shown.

Yes, I agree with you, but 9/27 would feel too risky for me, and I would have seen if Kyle would have come back for no more than $5.168, which is the tax-payers MLE. You’d have to explain to Anderson that, like any player, you could definitely be traded, but we’ll guarantee you’re here until February. I think with the lower salary, he would be tradeable for cap space, and perhaps net a little profit. It’s also possible that ownership would see he’s doing so well, they’d be willing to eat more lux taxes later.

So every time we have a new CBA, some smart GM finds a loophole, like Connelly did to add salary to a team over the second apron. I think a loophole also exists with timing luxury tax after the season. For example, people say signing Anderson at $9 mil would cost the Wolves $35 mil (not sure of the number), but that’s only true if that salary is on the books at the end of the season. Keep him for 2/3rds of the season, and he cost you $6 mil and no lux taxes. The truth is, every roster slot carries the potential to fill it with a player that has positive trade value, that you could potentially use in the regular season at a fair price (and provide injury insurance for other players), and maybe gain you an asset if dealt before the trade deadline. This may be like a hot potato, and MIN has used most of its assets to pay to dump a bad contract, but using those slots on good values helps in the regular season, and may help monetize Connelly’s ability to spot talent.

Exactly. Key words add salary, 2/3 of the season, injury insurance for other players. Kyle might not love that, but not a lot of teams have the money to pay him what he wants. I do feel like TC dropped the ball here if the TPE works like an MLE. That said, ownership clearly is telling him to cut costs. You don’t blame an employee for the decisions their boss makes. Although I do suspect that ownership is going to cost us TC next year.

[Domejandro]

Since people are confused…

1. Sign and trades do not generate TPE’s.
2. Golden State had no other pathway to signing him beyond a sign-and-trade. This deal hard caps them at the First Apron.
3. This deal is largely a way to treat Kyle Anderson right and allow him to sign with the team that he wanted to go to.
4. Minnesota decided that they could not afford bringing Kyle Anderson back at this price (welcome to the reality of the new CBA).
5. Getting a second round pick swap and cash for functionally doing absolutely nothing is obviously worthwhile (especially while generating good will with an outgoing player).
6. It is entirely possible that Kyle Anderson wanted to leave, you can’t hold an unrestricted free agent hostage.

All of the discussion around usable TPE’s is wrong, and the idea that the Minnesota Timberwolves could afford to just sign Kyle now and trade him later is not appropriately appreciating the new reality of the Second Apron (Minnesota cannot afford that financial risk for a Kyle Anderson level player).

1. Thank you for clearing that up, I really was confused.

2. I agree 1-5 and think that anything that makes players look favorably upon an organization is its own reward. Plus GSW might do us a similar type favor in the future. Good relationships matter.

3. I disagree on 6 only to the extent that bird rights are how teams add salary. The simple fact is ownership is trying to cut costs when they should be INCREASING spending and paying the tax. Kyle could have turned into two reasonable contract role players, or 1 rotation worthy player who was cheaper than him. Injury could mean eating the contract this year for nothing, and from ownerships vantage point that would suck. But losing Kyle and Monte for nothing is very bad because we cannot replace them for anything other than minimums. It is step in the wrong direction instead of the right one. But, it seems that either new ownership, Glen, or both don’t want to or don’t have the money and therefore our team will continue to miss opportunities.

The point of #6 is that it is entirety possible that Kyle Anderson preferred going to the Golden State Warriors at that price.

Regardless, if Minnesota has infinite money, then all that might be worth consideration. That said, Minnesota is already one of the most expensive rosters in the entire NBA. Expecting ownership to eat $50-60 million for Kyle Anderson (and/or maintain trade flexibility) is not tethered to reality, these are the tough calls that every single other team is making. The Clippers decided to move on from Paul George rather than giving him a five year deal in part because of Second Apron considerations, and Ballmer has near infinite money. Golden State waived Chris Paul instead of keeping him for “trade flexibility” because of the new salary cap. It is brutal.

[shrink]

Thanks shrink. So basically we're effed! Any ideas what we do about a backup 3rd string PG?

They can offer Jordan MacLaughlin more than the vet min, and he should take it. Good deal for us too, maintaining our continuity, but he’s quite limited and you have to pray his three point shot continues to fall.

Here’s a list of some free agent PGs. I don’t know who would come here to play for the minimum, but that’s all we can offer.

Tyus Jones. (Too expensive)
Spencer Dinwiddie
Kyle Lowry
Patrick Beverley
Cam Payne
Markelle Fultz
Dennis Smith Jr
Jordan Goodwin (MEM)
Killian Hayes
Malachi Flynn
Patty Mills
Corey Joseph
Ish Smith

I'm not crazy about anybody there we can afford. I like Dinwiddie but I don't know if we can afford him.

Yikes, Daishen Nix who has been with us on a two-way might be our best option. Yikes a 2nd time.

Corey Joseph? yikes!

I agree with you, so Dillingham really needs to be rushed into action. I assume we bring back MacLaughlin, but if Conley goes down this season, Dillingham and JMac are not enough, and there isn’t much in free agency either.

[BlacJacMac]

Not extend, sign him to a 9/27 using bird rights. I am trying to figure out if we lost something by doing it now rather than January or February.

Sorry, my reading skills have been really bad today, as several of my recent posts have shown.

Yes, I agree with you, but 9/27 would feel too risky for me, and I would have seen if Kyle would have come back for no more than $5.168, which is the tax-payers MLE. You’d have to explain to Anderson that, like any player, you could definitely be traded, but we’ll guarantee you’re here until February. I think with the lower salary, he would be tradeable for cap space, and perhaps net a little profit. It’s also possible that ownership would see he’s doing so well, they’d be willing to eat more lux taxes later.

So every time we have a new CBA, some smart GM finds a loophole, like Connelly did to add salary to a team over the second apron. I think a loophole also exists with timing luxury tax after the season. For example, people say signing Anderson at $9 mil would cost the Wolves $35 mil (not sure of the number), but that’s only true if that salary is on the books at the end of the season. Keep him for 2/3rds of the season, and he cost you $6 mil and no lux taxes. The truth is, every roster slot carries the potential to fill it with a player that has positive trade value, that you could potentially use in the regular season at a fair price (and provide injury insurance for other players), and maybe gain you an asset if dealt before the trade deadline. This may be like a hot potato, and MIN has used most of its assets to pay to dump a bad contract, but using those slots on good values helps in the regular season, and may help monetize Connelly’s ability to spot talent.

Exactly. Key words add salary, 2/3 of the season, injury insurance for other players. Kyle might not love that, but not a lot of teams have the money to pay him what he wants. I do feel like TC dropped the ball here if the TPE works like an MLE. That said, ownership clearly is telling him to cut costs. You don’t blame an employee for the decisions their boss makes. Although I do suspect that ownership is going to cost us TC next year.

What team that needs a GM is going to let TC go even more over the 2nd apron than we are?

I can’t imagine losing the SloMo asset is a deal breaker for him.

[shrink]

Yup backwards. Plus the new rules have me scratching my head.

You have me confused now. Can we or can we not sign a free agent with a TPE?

As youngguns said, we cannot. And to be extra clear as an apology for me sending backwards info ...

Teams will be permitted to use the non-taxpayer mid-level, room, and bi-annual exceptions as de facto trade exceptions beginning in 2024/25. For instance, a club could trade for a player earning $10MM using the non-taxpayer mid-level exception

[winforlose]

Sorry, my reading skills have been really bad today, as several of my recent posts have shown.

Yes, I agree with you, but 9/27 would feel too risky for me, and I would have seen if Kyle would have come back for no more than $5.168, which is the tax-payers MLE. You’d have to explain to Anderson that, like any player, you could definitely be traded, but we’ll guarantee you’re here until February. I think with the lower salary, he would be tradeable for cap space, and perhaps net a little profit. It’s also possible that ownership would see he’s doing so well, they’d be willing to eat more lux taxes later.

So every time we have a new CBA, some smart GM finds a loophole, like Connelly did to add salary to a team over the second apron. I think a loophole also exists with timing luxury tax after the season. For example, people say signing Anderson at $9 mil would cost the Wolves $35 mil (not sure of the number), but that’s only true if that salary is on the books at the end of the season. Keep him for 2/3rds of the season, and he cost you $6 mil and no lux taxes. The truth is, every roster slot carries the potential to fill it with a player that has positive trade value, that you could potentially use in the regular season at a fair price (and provide injury insurance for other players), and maybe gain you an asset if dealt before the trade deadline. This may be like a hot potato, and MIN has used most of its assets to pay to dump a bad contract, but using those slots on good values helps in the regular season, and may help monetize Connelly’s ability to spot talent.

Exactly. Key words add salary, 2/3 of the season, injury insurance for other players. Kyle might not love that, but not a lot of teams have the money to pay him what he wants. I do feel like TC dropped the ball here if the TPE works like an MLE. That said, ownership clearly is telling him to cut costs. You don’t blame an employee for the decisions their boss makes. Although I do suspect that ownership is going to cost us TC next year.

What team that needs a GM is going to let TC go even more over the 2nd apron than we are?

I can’t imagine losing the SloMo asset is a deal breaker for him.

TC wants to autonomy and to be competitive. I am saying cost cutting moves, including things like dumping KAT would drive him away. The Kyle issue is an example, or more precisely a straw, not necessarily the last straw.

Responding to Dom above, the Clippers have been in the tax for years, and would be signing long term an older and frequently injured max guy. To say we are discussing apples and oranges is an understatement. I am talking about ways to improve the roster at 7-10 spots for the next 2-4 years, you are talking about the 1 or 2 spot and that might as well be the difference between the Sun and the Moon.

You are correct that teams deal with this in our situation. Denver just lost KCP and have no mechanism to replace him. They take a step away from contending as a result. We are looking at replacing our 8-10 with rookies, non rotation development players, and vet minimums that other teams passed on. Next year we will be in this position again with 6-7 and maybe even sell low on Karl who is our 2nd or 3rd best overall player. I am not saying that 50-60 million of ownerships money isn’t a big deal, I am saying if they pinch pennies then we won’t grow the same way teams grew who added salary, paid the tax, and increased revenue as a result.

[BlacJacMac]

No GM has that level of autonomy.

[FrenchMinnyFan]

The PG free agent list is not exciting at all. Hayes is a good passer and play decent defense but is not a good shooter. Considering this list, i am wondering if NAW could not take the job and improve as a PG. Mike will remain good ( no doubt about that) and ANT will keep improving.

[winforlose]

The PG free agent list is not exciting at all. Hayes is a good passer and play decent defense but is not a good shooter. Considering this list, i am wondering if NAW could not take the job and improve as a PG. Mike will remain good ( no doubt about that) and ANT will keep improving.

JMAC and Bev are our best options, neither is great.