Trade Talk (Part 16): Early Season Anxiety Edition

[minimus]

Randle for Ball, Smith, and Portlands protected pick

On a scale of I hate it to the very notion of this makes me physically ill, you have actually broken the scale. Any deal with the Bulls starts with Coby White. White is the perfect pair with Ant, is on a value deal, and is the right age for the timeline. As for Ball, if his name isn’t Lamelo we need to stay the **** away, (and we aren’t getting Lamelo.) Lonzo is not someone who could ever be trusted in a deep playoff run, and you don’t trade Randle to get worse. Smith is decent, but I would rather Add Vuc for C depth and move Dozier to a 3rd team in the deal so we don’t need to cut anyone. We could also add Jingles to a 3rd team, use the roster spot to add a PF who made less than 12 before being waiver or bought out.

Depth chart

PG: Coby White, Mike, Dilly
SG: Ant, DDV, NAW
SF: Jaden, NAW, TSJ
PF: Naz, Minott, free agent with Ingles spot
C: Rudy, Vuc, Garza

I'm not a Coby White fan. Great scorer, but he's a PG in the same sense Ant is. And he's a horrible defender.

Lonzo Ball, if healthy, is actually the perfect pair with Ant. He's a knockdown 3pt shooter, a very good defender (with the size to be switchable) and rebounder and an absolute wizard in transition. He doesn't dominate the ball in the halfcourt at all. The injury is a major red flag, but unlike Simmons, you don't need to worry about his headspace. The injury is super scary, but if he was guaranteed healthy, there is no way you could even get him straight up for Randle.

And I love Smith for this team. He's a tremendous rebounder, a decent defender and he has enough stretch to his game to play the 4 or 5 on both ends. He could absolutely play with (or for) either Rudy or Naz.

I have same feelings. I am not so impressed with Smith because he is making 8mil, but he has developed his body and can play backup C.

The biggest difference between Lonzo Ball and Randle to me is narrative and marketing around trade. Lonzo Ball can be story of return and hardworking. Randle was advertised as All Star talent who played well for Finch in NOP. So if Ball fails it is not because he does not try hard, like Randle. IMO is is low risk, high reward trade. I believe that we already have two top-10 2025 FA in terms of talent/effort/age: Naz Reid and NAW. Both have been loyal to MIN, so it should be our top priority to keep them.

Read on Twitter

As much as I want to win-now, after WCF, I think that TC and Finch should be more focused about next season, e.g. develop Edwards, McDaniels, Minott, Reid, NAW and first of all Dillingham. I feel like some Randle minutes come as intention to increase his trade value. So let say Randle will be traded via sign-and-trade and MIN get SRP for facilitating it. Then re-sign Reid (20-25 mil AAV), NAW (10-15 mil AAV). Then let say Lonzo Ball play whole season injury free, I'd re-sign him for similarly structured contract to Jonathan Isaac: 1 year fully guaranteed + 1 year partially guaranteed, 2 years non guaranteed = 40 mil (10 mil AAV). I can see why Ball might re-sign here:

- this team with him healthy can be in top-4 in West
- he and Edwards can build a perfect chemistry, as they compliment each other well
- Ball has showed in CHI that he can be part of absolutely elite defensive unit. He played with Caruso in CHI, in MIN he will have McDaniels/NAW/DDV/Edwards. So replacing Randle with Ball is a pretty intriguing shift in defensive mentality
- Randle has been a very important part of our offensive identity. Currently MIN are top-5 in 3PA, a big chunk of them come as result of Randle assists from the paint. Lonzo with repaired knee cant slash, but, I feel like current MIN roster lacks facilitators in general, I mean guys who can make simple pass, beat pressure, organise offense. Something that McLaughlin, Morris and Anderson could do for us last season. This is a big reason why DDV has been struggling so mightily and cant find any rhythm. Lonzo is a true floor general. Also MIN is 24th in pace, and have been struggling to consistently score in transition and defend in transition. So having someone like Lonzo could help to keep high 3PA, despite losing Randle: Lonzo can facilitate, execute in half court and initiate fastbreaks

Gobert/Smith/Garza
Reid/Minott/Miller
McDaniels/NAW/TJ
Edwards/DDV + Clark
Ball/Dilly/Conley + Nix

[shangrila]

This one came REALLY close...barely worked. Not sure on the draft picks.

Mia in: Randle, Washington, Jaden Hardy, 2 Dal FRP
Mia out: Butler, Jovic, Burks

Dal in: Butler, Jovic, Burks
Dal out: Thompson, Kleber, Lively II, 3 FRP

Min in: Thompson, Kleber, Lively II, Dal FRP
MN out: Randle
Waive 2 (Ingles and Dozier?)

*You could also exchange Marshall and Exum for Kleber*

Respectfully, this is delusional.

Butler isn't pulling anything close to this. And Randle is sure as hell not bringing back a pick + Lively. Or Lively at all.

[winforlose]

Yes, contenders generally pay “some” lux. However, the amount of lux varies, and every additional salary penalizes you more and more, as the rates rise. You’ll also note that several contenders (like LAC and GSW) from the last couple years had to jump down in payroll because lux taxes and repeater taxes (and now apron rules) just get too crazy.

I’m obviously not saying ownership won’t pay lux taxes this year and next. This year, our total payroll plus lux penalties is close to $300 million. What I’m saying is that we already have a lot of salary locked in,and every additional contract we sign has an ever-more punitive expense attached to it. At some point, owners and GMs look at a bench player, and have to justify if that guy is worth the real dollars it will cost the owner to add him.

https://www.spotrac.com/nba/tax/_/year/2024/sort/tax_total

You’re so right that you actually become wrong. I know that sounds silly, but the truth is it takes money to make money. A new stadium is a revenue source, a 2 team expansion is a revenue source, the new TV money is a revenue source, sold out high priced tickets (especially season tickets,) are a revenue source. The Wolves cannot depend on big market support to stay profitable. Look at ticket and Merch sales since we got good compared to when we sucked. If you go cheap (trading KAT,) you lose money trying to save money. If we do this here and there the value will diminish. Too much and the value will evaporate.

But the reality is....we aren't really making as much money relative to our success because of our arena situation. That, our market, etc. will always hold us back compared to other franchise. Our revenue ceiling is currently probably 15th-20th.

You realize if we are bottom 15 we benefit from revenue sharing? I cannot remember where we are in revenue. I can look it up later. Either way, more success means more money, less success means less money.

[thinktank]

I like Randle for Jerami Grant.

Portland is tanking anyway, so Randle and his deal
are a good fit. Grant makes 30 million and is under control until 27/28 at 36 million. That’s great value!

[winforlose]

I like Randle for Jerami Grant.

Portland is tanking anyway, so Randle and his deal
are a good fit. Grant makes 30 million and is under control until 27/28 at 36 million. That’s great value!

The flip side is that 30 means losing one of NAW or Naz. Also is Naz the 6th man going forward or do we want to promote him to starting PF. You are not going to replace Jaden’s defense with Grant, so one of Grant or Naz is a bench guy. I see us therefore losing Naz to keep NAW and I don’t know that this is an upgrade. Losing Randle and Naz for Grant seems a bit much.

[Slim Tubby]

I like Randle for Jerami Grant.

Portland is tanking anyway, so Randle and his deal
are a good fit. Grant makes 30 million and is under control until 27/28 at 36 million. That’s great value!

Grant is averaging 15/3/2 while shooting 38%/35% splits.

There is ZERO value in that contract, doesn't get us out of the 2nd Apron and quite possibly makes us the worst rebounding team in the NBA.

Maybe this is our reality, and if it is, our roster and talent level regression from last year is beyond disheartening.

In a pathetic effort to save the ownership groups from luxury tax penalties, we managed to accomplish the following:

1. No relief from the 2nd Apron

2. No improved trade/roster/cap flexibility

3. Decreased offensive efficiency

4. Decreased defensive flexibility and efficiency

5. Poor team chemistry

The KAT trade, when coupled with all of the lost tradable assets in the Gobert deal, will haunt this organization for years to come.

In:
* Rudy Gobert
* Exp. Randle contract (No cap relief)
* Donte DiVincenzo
* Protected 2025 FRP (DET) that will never convey

Out:
* Karl Anthony Towns
* Walker Kessler
* 2023 Unprotected FRP
* 2025 Unprotected FRP
* 2026 Unprotected Swap
* 2027 Unprotected FRP
* 2028 Unprotected Swap
* 2029 Unprotected FRP

Complete and utter incompetence from a GM that might very well walk at the end of the season. One (1) trip to the WCF doesn't cover the stench of these deals. Rant over.

Sent from my N152DL using RealGM mobile app

[thinktank]

He fits better than Randle, imo. Much easier to incorporate without completely changing your identity.

Yes, the rebounding would probably be an issue, but every move has trade offs.

[winforlose]

I like Randle for Jerami Grant.

Portland is tanking anyway, so Randle and his deal
are a good fit. Grant makes 30 million and is under control until 27/28 at 36 million. That’s great value!

Grant is averaging 15/3/2 while shooting 38%/35% splits.

There is ZERO value in that contract, doesn't get us out of the 2nd Apron and quite possibly makes us the worst rebounding team in the NBA.

Maybe this is our reality, and if it is, our roster and talent level regression from last year is beyond disheartening.

In a pathetic effort to save the ownership groups from luxury tax penalties, we managed to accomplish the following:

1. No relief from the 2nd Apron

2. No improved trade/roster/cap flexibility

3. Decreased offensive efficiency

4. Decreased defensive flexibility and efficiency

5. Poor team chemistry

The KAT trade, when coupled with all of the lost tradable assets in the Gobert deal, will haunt this organization for years to come.

In:
* Rudy Gobert
* Exp. Randle contract (No cap relief)
* Donte DiVincenzo
* Protected 2025 FRP (DET) that will never convey

Out:
* Karl Anthony Towns
* Walker Kessler
* 2023 Unprotected FRP
* 2025 Unprotected FRP
* 2026 Unprotected Swap
* 2027 Unprotected FRP
* 2028 Unprotected Swap
* 2029 Unprotected FRP

Complete and utter incompetence from a GM that might very well walk at the end of the season. One (1) trip to the WCF doesn't cover the stench of these deals. Rant over.

Sent from my N152DL using RealGM mobile app

I am very wary of TC as well. But I think we need 3 facts for context.

1. There was no second apron when the Rudy trade was made. The CBA came later.

2. The Rudy trade was also supposed to help Dlo. Had it worked, we wouldn’t have been backed into the Conley corner and been forced to trade for Dilly. Now the true value of that trade remains to be seen, but people write off an unprotected first and a top 1 protected pick swap like they are nothing. Those assets have value, and that value increases as time passes.

3. The ownership battle and money situation are both wrinkles that might not have been foreseen at the time of the initial planning.

I do agree that TC has done a bad job and we are worse than we might have been in someone else’s hands (thanks for drafting Wendell for example,) but whose hands would we be in, and what would they have done differently?

[cmoss84]

This one came REALLY close...barely worked. Not sure on the draft picks.

Mia in: Randle, Washington, Jaden Hardy, 2 Dal FRP
Mia out: Butler, Jovic, Burks

Dal in: Butler, Jovic, Burks
Dal out: Thompson, Kleber, Lively II, 3 FRP

Min in: Thompson, Kleber, Lively II, Dal FRP
MN out: Randle
Waive 2 (Ingles and Dozier?)

*You could also exchange Marshall and Exum for Kleber*

Respectfully, this is delusional.

Butler isn't pulling anything close to this. And Randle is sure as hell not bringing back a pick + Lively. Or Lively at all.

Concur. Made some adjustments yesterday...it would look more like this:

Mia in: Randle, Washington, Hardy
Mia out: Butler, Jovic, Burks
WHY? 1st apron, good value back from Butler and Jovic, options and flexibility moving forward.

Dal in: Butler, Jovic, Burks, FRP (DET), SRP (Utah)
Dal out: Thompson, Lively II, Marshall, Exum, Washington, Hardy
WHY? 1st apron hard-capped, Butler completes their trio, get rid of Thompson's contract, nice young player in Jovic, and another shooter in Burks (expiring). Hurts getting rid of Lively II, but they decide the juice is worth the squeeze.
***They would be short a few players-would have to make additional moves***

MN in: Thompson, Lively II, Exum, Marshall
MN out: Randle, '25 FRP (Det), '25 SRP (UTAH)
WHY? We would still be 2nd apron, but excellent value for Randle. Thompson bad contract, but we get some nostalgic scoring off the bench. Or we trade him. Exum a nice PG the rest of this year (expiring). Marshall a decent piece. Lively II is center piece. We lose a couple draft picks, but our roster is tight and we will need to waive a player or two anyway, more than likely.
***Does this allow us to keep NAW and/or NAZ???***

[minimus]

He fits better than Randle, imo. Much easier to incorporate without completely changing your identity.

Yes, the rebounding would probably be an issue, but every move has trade offs.

Well, after Grant left DEN, he played for bad and very bad teams such as DET and POR. It might be an another Monte Morris situation, to me his four 20PPG seasons mean a little, since he will be asked to play on another level in defense. Is he better than Reid at PF? I don't think so. So I'd rather let Randle go, or trade him via sign-and -trade like TC did with Kyle Anderson, and give all these minutes to Reid.

[shrink]

In a pathetic effort to save the ownership groups from luxury tax penalties, we managed to accomplish the following:

1. No relief from the 2nd Apron

2. No improved trade/roster/cap flexibility

3. Decreased offensive efficiency

4. Decreased defensive flexibility and efficiency

5. Poor team chemistry

I would disagree with most of this.

1. You can’t argue that ownership was trying to save themselves luxury taxes, and also complain they left the payroll high this year so they didn’t get under the second apron.

2. I think we have a lot more flexibility. With the new apron rules, Towns on a supermax legally couldn’t be traded to many teams. In addition, he is not a fit on many teams for age reasons, salary reasons, or team construction (need defender to help protect the rim). Randle is less valuable, but his expiring-ish contract at $33 can be traded. DDV is a good contract, and fits many teams salary slots. And of course, the DET pick is flexible. You may not like the amount of value, but the flexibility greatly increased.

3. Agree that the offense is likely to be worse. It is possible though to see that this isn’t a great decline. DDV’s game is a perfect fit for Finch’s offense, and while Randle isn’t the efficient shooter that Towns is, the team can use his playmaking,

4. Disagree. Randle hasn’t bought into the defensive culture yet, and maybe he never will, but he certainly has the physical ability to be a Towns-level defender. DiVincenzo is a good defending wing, and that makes us more flexible. Over the last two weeks,Ibelieve MIN has the #1 defense.

5. Team chemistry has been poor, but it has improved with the team winning 4-of-5 games. I don’t think it will reach the level with the affable Towns, but it should continue to improve as the team has more time to develop together. I am eager to see if the three practices this week make the Wolves look even sharper.

[Klomp]

You’re so right that you actually become wrong. I know that sounds silly, but the truth is it takes money to make money. A new stadium is a revenue source, a 2 team expansion is a revenue source, the new TV money is a revenue source, sold out high priced tickets (especially season tickets,) are a revenue source. The Wolves cannot depend on big market support to stay profitable. Look at ticket and Merch sales since we got good compared to when we sucked. If you go cheap (trading KAT,) you lose money trying to save money. If we do this here and there the value will diminish. Too much and the value will evaporate.

But the reality is....we aren't really making as much money relative to our success because of our arena situation. That, our market, etc. will always hold us back compared to other franchise. Our revenue ceiling is currently probably 15th-20th.

You realize if we are bottom 15 we benefit from revenue sharing? I cannot remember where we are in revenue. I can look it up later. Either way, more success means more money, less success means less money.

But we don't get a cut of the tax if we're paying it. So that needs to be in the conversation as well.

[shrink]

So I have been seeing several trades here and on the trade board where MIN trades away Randle, and takes back 3-4 players. Many of them have us including incentive to get the right guy. Several of the players we might have to drop could have value to a rebuilding team (I often see people use DET as a salary eater to make trades legal). For example

MIN: sends Randle to a contender
CONTENDER: turns Randle into expirings, picks and prospects for a rebuilder
REBUILDER: sends MIN a vet star to replace Randle, and more veteran cheap players that usurp our kids future minutes.

My question is, if we needed to add more incentive, who are our young players we’d be willing to trade away? Maybe make this the order we’d least like to give up a guy? For example, here’s my list, assuming a new player slides in in front. Please tell me how you think Tim Connelly would change it.

Nix, Jaylen Clark, Jesse Edwards - no value, two ways, don’t create roster spots
Dozier - no value
Ingles - no value
Garza - no value

1 Leonard Miller
2 Josh Minott
3 DET 1st
4 TJ Shannon
5 NAW
6 Dillingham

Is that the order, 1-6, that would be the hardest for Connelly to include in a trade to open roster spots?

[Klomp]

1 Leonard Miller
2 Josh Minott
3 DET 1st
4 TJ Shannon
5 NAW
6 Dillingham

Is that the order, 1-6, that would be the hardest for Connelly to include in a trade to open roster spots?

I think this is probably the order

[shrink]

But the reality is....we aren't really making as much money relative to our success because of our arena situation. That, our market, etc. will always hold us back compared to other franchise. Our revenue ceiling is currently probably 15th-20th.

You realize if we are bottom 15 we benefit from revenue sharing? I cannot remember where we are in revenue. I can look it up later. Either way, more success means more money, less success means less money.

But we don't get a cut of the tax if we're paying it. So that needs to be in the conversation as well.

Right, the lux share has nothing to do with revenues - it’s all about team payroll.

At the end of the year, the NBA collects all its luxury taxes, and redistributes them. They keep half for “operating expenses” and the rest is divided up equally between all the teams that didn’t pay luxury taxes. This year, 15 teams are projected to pay almost $600 mil in lux taxes (MIN paying about $100 mil of that). For the 15 teams that keep their payroll under the luxury threshold of $170.8, they each get a check for a cool $20 mil [($600 / 2) / 15]. This is extra incentive to stay out of the lux if a team’s close.

[cmoss84]

So I have been seeing several trades here and on the trade board where MIN trades away Randle, and takes back 3-4 players. Many of them have us including incentive to get the right guy. Several of the players we might have to drop could have value to a rebuilding team (I often see people use DET as a salary eater to make trades legal). For example

MIN: sends Randle to a contender
CONTENDER: turns Randle into expirings, picks and prospects for a rebuilder
REBUILDER: sends MIN a vet star to replace Randle, and more veteran cheap players that usurp our kids future minutes.

My question is, if we needed to add more incentive, who are our young players we’d be willing to trade away? Maybe make this the order we’d least like to give up a guy? For example, here’s my list, assuming a new player slides in in front. Please tell me how you think Tim Connelly would change it.

Nix, Jaylen Clark, Jesse Edwards - no value, two ways, don’t create roster spots
Dozier - no value
Ingles - no value
Garza - no value

1 Leonard Miller
2 Josh Minott
3 DET 1st
4 TJ Shannon
5 NAW
6 Dillingham

Is that the order, 1-6, that would be the hardest for Connelly to include in a trade to open roster spots?

For me...no issues getting rid of Minott, DET 1st, or TJ. I'm not giving up NAW, Miller, or RD unless we get a great deal.

[Klomp]

Nickeil Alexander-Walker for Quentin Grimes

Does either team consider it?

[BlacJacMac]

Nickeil Alexander-Walker for Quentin Grimes

Does either team consider it?

If we're trading NAW, I don't see us targeting another SG.

[Klomp]

One other sign that points to a higher likelihood of a Randle trade is that in his time here, Connelly has shown that he is not afraid to move off of his "mistakes" quickly.

[Klomp]

Nickeil Alexander-Walker for Quentin Grimes

Does either team consider it?

If we're trading NAW, I don't see us targeting another SG.

Good point