Trade Talk (Part 16): Early Season Anxiety Edition

[winforlose]

I know people are down on Randle, but I think he has trade value. He’s averaging 20-7-4, and he’s been an All NBA PF twice in the last four years. His $33 mil contract is not excessive in today’s NBA, plus there is a decent chance he could b an expiring. This is the type of mercenary talent that teams go after for a playoff run.

While he may have some value, wolves historically don’t do well in trades. Look at what we got for Karl. I doubt we get fair value for Randle.

You say that but we did well on Mike and NAW for Dlo. The key will be TC dealing like his reputation is at stake, because it might be. The only way to change the discussion on you faster than building a contender is dismantling one. At this point, he is close to getting credit for that. Especially if Ant leaves and succeeds elsewhere.

[Guest84]

I know people are down on Randle, but I think he has trade value. He’s averaging 20-7-4, and he’s been an All NBA PF twice in the last four years. His $33 mil contract is not excessive in today’s NBA, plus there is a decent chance he could b an expiring. This is the type of mercenary talent that teams go after for a playoff run.

While he may have some value, wolves historically don’t do well in trades. Look at what we got for Karl. I doubt we get fair value for Randle.

You say that but we did well on Mike and NAW for Dlo. The key will be TC dealing like his reputation is at stake, because it might be. The only way to change the discussion on you faster than building a contender is dismantling one. At this point, he is close to getting credit for that. Especially if Ant leaves and succeeds elsewhere.

That’s the one trade I wasn’t including in that, just didn’t mention it. If you want to count the Rudy trade, I guess you can even though it was prob still an overpay.

The fact that we keep referring back to the Mike trade only should tell us something about the success rate of wolves trades historically. Unless you’re only speaking about the TC era.

I guess I’m just in a “prove me wrong” state when it comes to the wolves. They consistently know how to rip the excitement away from fans like no other team.

[winforlose]

While he may have some value, wolves historically don’t do well in trades. Look at what we got for Karl. I doubt we get fair value for Randle.

You say that but we did well on Mike and NAW for Dlo. The key will be TC dealing like his reputation is at stake, because it might be. The only way to change the discussion on you faster than building a contender is dismantling one. At this point, he is close to getting credit for that. Especially if Ant leaves and succeeds elsewhere.

That’s the one trade I wasn’t including in that, just didn’t mention it. If you want to count the Rudy trade, I guess you can even though it was prob still an overpay.

The fact that we keep referring back to the Mike trade only should tell us something about the success rate of wolves trades historically. Unless you’re only speaking about the TC era.

I guess I’m just in a “prove me wrong” state when it some to the wolves. They consistently know how to rip the excitement away from fans like no other team.

I was just talking TC era. Thibs flubbed the Jimmy trade by not sending Wiggins and keeping Lavine and Markkanen. We would have been bad one year, and then had all the tools to turn things around, (or at least move players to get the right players.) Rosas badly wanted Dlo for KAT and overpaid for him. The Roco trade was interesting I wouldn’t call it a failure. Following the path to Rudy I agree it was an overpay and I (someone who thinks Rudy is elite and top 10 in the NBA,) wouldn’t have paid what we did for Rudy. Overall I have a terrible opinion of TC and I think more people will soon share that opinion as his poor decisions turn into a trail of destruction.

[minimus]

Read on Twitter

I guess this the way for MIN to move forward with Randle: get financial flexibility, keep core players, re-group. Nothing spectacular

[Loaf_of_bread]

Read on Twitter

I guess this the way for MIN to move forward with Randle: get financial flexibility, keep core players, re-group. Nothing spectacular

He has a player option, which it's looking like he will pick up... even though it's goofy, and then put in better effort next year for his next contract. Randle has no self-respect, just a poor character guy all-around.

[shrink]

I know people are down on Randle, but I think he has trade value. He’s averaging 20-7-4, and he’s been an All NBA PF twice in the last four years. His $33 mil contract is not excessive in today’s NBA, plus there is a decent chance he could b an expiring. This is the type of mercenary talent that teams go after for a playoff run.

I just want to clarify, my point isn’t even about Randle, but the “Randle-type” of player.

Internet boards constantly undervalue the big name players that are stars, but not superstars. In fact, over the last few years or so, we have seen players of this caliber get labeled “untradeable” or “you’d need to include multiple first round picks to trade him!” However in real life, we see these players get traded again and again. often for neutral or slightly positive value. Moreover, these are often players that have contracts with multiple years of max level money. Randle’s deal is not only reasonable, it’s short, which would make him appealing to all types of contenders and raise his trade value further.

If a team is not tanking, most real life GMs and owners want to maximize how well they do in that season. They often gamble on upside, because they need upside to reach a point where the season is considered a success. It’s why we see so many deals that the internet labels “overpays” to add talent to a team. Randle may be disliked, but he is certainly talented. You don’t score 20 PPG in the NBA without talent. I don’t think we will trade him, but if we do, I think it will be for a better return than many expect.

[Loaf_of_bread]

I know people are down on Randle, but I think he has trade value. He’s averaging 20-7-4, and he’s been an All NBA PF twice in the last four years. His $33 mil contract is not excessive in today’s NBA, plus there is a decent chance he could b an expiring. This is the type of mercenary talent that teams go after for a playoff run.

I just want to clarify, my point isn’t even about Randle, but the “Randle-type” of player.

Internet boards constantly undervalue the big name players that are stars, but not superstars. In fact, over the last few years or so, we have seen players of this caliber get labeled “untradeable” or “you’d need to include multiple first round picks to trade him!” However in real life, we see these players get traded again and again. often for neutral or slightly positive value. Moreover, these are often players that have contracts with multiple years of max level money. Randle’s deal is not only reasonable, it’s short, which would make him appealing to all types of contenders and raise his trade value further.

If a team is not tanking, most real life GMs and owners want to maximize how well they do in that season. They often gamble on upside, because they need upside to reach a point where the season is considered a success. It’s why we see so many deals that the internet labels “overpays” to add talent to a team. Randle may be disliked, but he is certainly talented. You don’t score 20 PPG in the NBA without talent. I don’t think we will trade him, but if we do, I think it will be for a better return than many expect.

Scoring 20 ppg in the NBA, while individually allowing the opposition more than 20 ppg for playing poor defense isn’t talent...

[BlacJacMac]

At this point, I think that the best situation (should the team trade Julius Randle) would be one where the target is Cameron Johnson.

Think something like…

BRK: Tim Hardaway Jr. and DET FRP
OUT: Cameron Johnson

DET: Julius Randle and P.J. Dozier
OUT: Tim Hardaway Jr., Simone Fontecchio, and DET FRP

MIN: Cameron Johnson and Simone Fontecchio
OUT: Julius Randle and P.J. Dozier

Same format exists with the Chicago Bulls (Jalen Smith) and the Miami HEAT (two of Haywood Highsmith, Kel’el Ware, Kevin Love, or Josh Richardson).

Would give Minnesota a starting forward who shoots 42% from behind-the-arc who is under contract for two more seasons and a potential additional role-player.

Unfortunately our starting forwards would average 8 rebounds combined...

[shrink]

Scoring 20 ppg in the NBA, while individually allowing the opposition more than 20 ppg for playing poor defense isn’t talent...

Nope. The league has been filled with high scoring, bad-defense players, and NBA teams often give them max deals.

[minimus]

Unfortunately our starting forwards would average 8 rebounds combined...

I think team rebounding is a bit more complicated than comparing players, positions and sum of rebounds per game. For instance, WHEN perimeter players keep playing attached to their opponents on perimeter, then players in backline have more chances to get defensive rebounds. If perimeter players either allow open three point shots or get blown, then you lose defensive boards, because bigs must player higher.

[Loaf_of_bread]

Scoring 20 ppg in the NBA, while individually allowing the opposition more than 20 ppg for playing poor defense isn’t talent...

Nope. The league has been filled with high scoring, bad-defense players, and NBA teams often give them max deals.

So what is he worth per year in your opinion?

[minimus]

Nope. The league has been filled with high scoring, bad-defense players, and NBA teams often give them max deals.

So what is he worth per year in your opinion?

Is Tobias Harris contract a good example?

[shrink]

Scoring 20 ppg in the NBA, while individually allowing the opposition more than 20 ppg for playing poor defense isn’t talent...

Nope. The league has been filled with high scoring, bad-defense players, and NBA teams often give them max deals.

So what is he worth per year in your opinion?

In today’s NBA dollars, probably around $40, as a playoff team’s #2 scorer, or a worse team’s #1 guy, just to make them respectable in their losses. I don’t like comps for salaries, but maybe somewhere in the Zach LaVine, Fred Van Vleet, Brandon Ingram, Michael Porter Jr range.

This is a particularly tough salary range to pin down (again, why I don’t like comps) because some players are getting paid on previous production, and teams hope they will have another good season to two. For example, I wouldn’t trade Randle for a $50 mil Kawhi or Paul George, or Jamal Murray, who’l next season start an extension north of $50 per year for four years. Since these players have been big names (Randle too), sometimes owners pay more because their casual fanbase wants to see the guy. That is not an issue though with Randle and MIN fans!

[Loaf_of_bread]

Nope. The league has been filled with high scoring, bad-defense players, and NBA teams often give them max deals.

So what is he worth per year in your opinion?

In today’s NBA dollars, probably around $40, as a playoff team’s #2 scorer, or a worse team’s #1 guy, just to make them respectable in their losses. I don’t like comps for salaries, but maybe somewhere in the Zach LaVine, Fred Van Vleet, Brandon Ingram, Michael Porter Jr range.

If he doesn't get traded, we will find out if you're right.

[minimus]

FVV has been one of the most consistent defensive guards in NBA. He is an opposite of Randle in defense, because FVV lacks physical tools, but he works so hard. Plus he doesn't disappear in clutch. Also his 40mil contract was constructed with team option.

LaVine is a bad defender, but he is such a dynamic scorer. MPJ is broken, but he is a champion. Also I think Murray regression in some way affected MPJ.

[shrink]

So what is he worth per year in your opinion?

In today’s NBA dollars, probably around $40, as a playoff team’s #2 scorer, or a worse team’s #1 guy, just to make them respectable in their losses. I don’t like comps for salaries, but maybe somewhere in the Zach LaVine, Fred Van Vleet, Brandon Ingram, Michael Porter Jr range.

If he doesn't get traded, we will find out if you're right.

Very true. It’s a two way street though, because you need to assess the value of all the players that come in.

This trade is a good example. Before this trade, there was a very vocal group of posters who felt Towns wasn’t worth his supermax extension, and with KAT’s flaws (stray voltage, injuries, center defense), they had a point. I disagreed, but whatever. At the same time, there was a vocal group of people who didn’t like Randle either, and the two groups often overlapped, hating big salaries on older, #2 guys.

So when the trade happens, those people could say “See, I was right! Towns wasn’t worth much, because all he got back was Randle, DDV, and a pick!”

And another group that likes players like that could say, “See, I was right! Towns was worth a lot, because he brought back RANDLE plus DDV and a pick!”

In the end, trade value is always kind of ambiguous. When we look for real life assessments, we either need to base it on our subjective trade values of the other players in a trade, or when they sign a new, market rate contract. A player has 30 different values to 30 teams, so both methods only give us a shadow of the truth.

However, if we see Connelly take an obvious garbage package to dump Randle, we’ll certainly see I’m wrong!

[Loaf_of_bread]

In today’s NBA dollars, probably around $40, as a playoff team’s #2 scorer, or a worse team’s #1 guy, just to make them respectable in their losses. I don’t like comps for salaries, but maybe somewhere in the Zach LaVine, Fred Van Vleet, Brandon Ingram, Michael Porter Jr range.

If he doesn't get traded, we will find out if you're right.

Very true. It’s a two way street though, because you need to assess the value of all the players that come in.

This trade is a good example. Before this trade, there was a very vocal group of posters who felt Towns wasn’t worth his supermax extension, and with KAT’s flaws (stray voltage, injuries, center defense), they had a point. I disagreed, but whatever. At the same time, there was a vocal group of people who didn’t like Randle either, and the two groups often overlapped, hating big salaries on older, #2 guys.

So when the trade happens, people could say “See, I was right! Towns wasn’t worth much, because all he got back was Randle, DDV, and a pick!”

And another group that likes players like that could say, “See, I was right! Towns was worth a lot, because he brought back RANDLE plus DDV and a pick!”

In the end, trade value is always kind of ambiguous. When we look for real life assessments, we either need to base it on our subjective trade values of the other players in a trade, or when they sign a new, market rate contract. A player has 30 different values to 30 teams, so both methods only give us a shadow of the truth.

However, if we see Connelly take an obvious garbage package to dump Randle, we’ll certainly see I’m wrong!

My personal worry is that we can't trade him, he opts in, goes off next year, and we sign him to a multi year extension.

[BlacJacMac]

Unfortunately our starting forwards would average 8 rebounds combined...

I think team rebounding is a bit more complicated than comparing players, positions and sum of rebounds per game. For instance, WHEN perimeter players keep playing attached to their opponents on perimeter, then players in backline have more chances to get defensive rebounds. If perimeter players either allow open three point shots or get blown, then you lose defensive boards, because bigs must player higher.

The problem remains that you have two skinny forwards that don't rebound well individually and don't box out.

We'd get crushed on the glass starting the 2 of them.

[shrink]

I’m not endorsing it, but if you were interested in Fontecchio in a trade with Randle trade, Fontecchio and Tobias Harris barely squeezes in legally, and value differences can be made up by altering the protections on the DET pick they already owe us.

[BlacJacMac]

I like Fontecchio quite a bit, but I'm not a Tobias Harris fan at all.