Trade Talk (Part 16): Early Season Anxiety Edition

[shrink]

Toronto isn’t trading Scottie Barnes for that package.

How short am I? In draft picks any way?

The problem is that players like these are more valuable to their current team. For an 8-30 Raptors team, they can’t sell tickets to their fans saying how good they are. They have to sell hope. “Come see the big new thing, before he certainly becomes a superstar!” I imagine Barnes is all over their marketing material, and he’s the current face of the franchise.

The two hardest players for a team to trade are either their best player, or their most exciting young prospect, depending on the season’s goals. We should only offer what Barnes is worth to us, which would likely be less than what he’s worth to TOR.

[winforlose]

Toronto isn’t trading Scottie Barnes for that package.

How short am I? In draft picks any way?

The problem is that players like these are more valuable to their current team. For an 8-30 Raptors team, they can’t sell tickets to their fans saying how good they are. They have to sell hope. “Come see the big new thing, before he certainly becomes a superstar!” I imagine Barnes is all over their marketing material, and he’s current face of the franchise.

The two hardest players for a team to trade are either their best player, or their most exciting young prospect, depending on the season’s goals. We should only offer what Barnes is worth to us, which would likely be less than what he’s worth to TOR.

It won’t happen because SGA is too good to leave OKC, but the Raptors should aim for as much of team Canada as possible. That way they elevate their chances in international competition (develop chemistry,) and have a gimmick to attract Canadian fans.

[cmoss84]

Toronto isn’t trading Scottie Barnes for that package.

How short am I? In draft picks any way?

The problem is that players like these are more valuable to their current team. For an 8-30 Raptors team, they can’t sell tickets to their fans saying how good they are. They have to sell hope. “Come see the big new thing, before he certainly becomes a superstar!” I imagine Barnes is all over their marketing material, and he’s the current face of the franchise.

The two hardest players for a team to trade are either their best player, or their most exciting young prospect, depending on the season’s goals. We should only offer what Barnes is worth to us, which would likely be less than what he’s worth to TOR.

If my team was 8-30, I'd want a rebuild to start winning ASAP

[moss_is_1]

Left-field idea: Jaden McDaniels for Deni Avdija and Toumani Camara

I'm a big big fan of Deni and was very impressed with Camara when we played Portland. Avdija reminds me of a bit of Gallinari. Can handle, underrated defender, and a good shooter(gallo was a better shooter) and he's still only 24 years old.

[shrink]

I thought it might be helpful for Randle trade-makers if I gave examples of legal and illegal trades under the new apron rules.

In any legal multi-player trade, each team can construct it on their end to help themselves. Normally this maneuvering is done to maximize TPE’s, but we’d also need to do it to be legal under two apron rules we must follow. The first apron means we can’t add salary in any trade, and the second is that we can’t aggregate salary. I think DET may be our most likely trade partner, so let’s play with them. Remember, I am not proposing ANY of these trades - I am using the CONTRACTS to demonstrate what’s legal.

MIN PIECES: Randle $33, NAW $4.3, Miller $1.9
DET PIECES: Tim Hardaway $16.2 Isaiah Stewart $15, Malik Beasley $6, Marcus Sasser $2.8, Bobi Klintman $1.3, cap space $14

Let’s play!
—————————-

1. Randle + NAW for Hardaway + Stewart. Legal or Illegal?

Spoiler:

Legal. Two trades. Randle for Hardaway and Stewart, and NAW for “nothing/cash”. Both simultaneous trades don’t take back salary, and just because we send out two players, it does not mean we had to aggregate those salaries together to legally get a more expensive player

2. Randle + NAW for Hardaway + Stewart + Klintman. Legal or Illegal?

Spoiler:

Legal. Randle for Hardaway + Stewart + Klintman, and NAW for nothing. Those DET three salaries still don’t add up to Randle’s. Note that constructing it this way gets us a full $4.3 TPE, which we might be able to use in the future legally if we reduce payroll. Constructing it Randle for Hardaway + Stewart, and NAW for Klintman is also legal, but creates two, less useful TPEs.

3. Randle + Miller for Hardaway + Stewart + Sasser. Legal or Illegal?

Spoiler:

Illegal. The three DET players cost more than Randle, so his part of the deal can only be Randle for Hardaway and Stewart. Sasser makes more than Miller.

4. Randle for Stewart + Beasley. Legal or Illegal?

Spoiler:

Legal. MIN clearly is taking less. I included this to show that while DET is taking much less than matching rules require, teams under the salary cap do not have to salary match, as long as their payroll remains under the salary cap after the trade.

[cmoss84]

Gonna throw out a unique one as the game starts:
Det IN: Ingram and NAW
Det OUT: Stewart, Thompson, '25 SRP (wash), '25 SRP (tor)
NOP IN: Jaden, Stewart, Thompson, '25 FRP (Det)
NOP OUT: Ingram, Murphy III, Missi

MN IN: Murphy III, Missi, '25 SRP (wash), '25 SRP (tor)
MN OUT: Jaden, NAW, '25 FRP (Det)

We then trade Randle for Ball and Smith.

PG: Ball-Mike-RD
SG: Ant and DD
SF: NAZ, Murphy III
PF: Smith, NAZ
C: Rudy and Missi

[winforlose]

Gonna throw out a unique one as the game starts:
Det IN: Ingram and NAW
Det OUT: Stewart, Thompson, '25 SRP (wash), '25 SRP (tor)
NOP IN: Jaden, Stewart, Thompson, '25 FRP (Det)
NOP OUT: Ingram, Murphy III, Missi

MN IN: Murphy III, Missi, '25 SRP (wash), '25 SRP (tor)
MN OUT: Jaden, NAW, '25 FRP (Det)

We then trade Randle for Ball and Smith.

PG: Ball-Mike-RD
SG: Ant and DD
SF: NAZ, Murphy III
PF: Smith, NAZ
C: Rudy and Missi

We manage to get worse and give up a first. We also turn the leading Rookie C into a 16 MPG backup. Not my taste but Ball fans might like it.

[cmoss84]

Gonna throw out a unique one as the game starts:
Det IN: Ingram and NAW
Det OUT: Stewart, Thompson, '25 SRP (wash), '25 SRP (tor)
NOP IN: Jaden, Stewart, Thompson, '25 FRP (Det)
NOP OUT: Ingram, Murphy III, Missi

MN IN: Murphy III, Missi, '25 SRP (wash), '25 SRP (tor)
MN OUT: Jaden, NAW, '25 FRP (Det)

We then trade Randle for Ball and Smith.

PG: Ball-Mike-RD
SG: Ant and DD
SF: NAZ, Murphy III
PF: Smith, NAZ
C: Rudy and Missi

We manage to get worse and give up a first. We also turn the leading Rookie C into a 16 MPG backup. Not my taste but Ball fans might like it.

Not a Trey Murphy fan I take it. It would also give us 3 early 2nd rounders. But I always appreciate the feedback!

[minimus]

By giving Murphy an extension (and not giving extension to Ingram) NOP confirmed that he is part of their core. Also I don't see NOP trading both. Also Herb Jones and McDaniels are too similar.

I am big Murphy fan, but trading both our best defenders PoA McDaniels and NAW doesn't make sense

[cmoss84]

By giving Murphy an extension (and not giving extension to Ingram) NOP confirmed that he is part of their core. Also I don't see NOP trading both. Also Herb Jones and McDaniels are too similar.

I am big Murphy fan, but trading both our best defenders PoA McDaniels and NAW doesn't make sense

My thought process is we have to choose between NAW and DD. DD might be slightly better and cheaper. Also, this allows us to cut Mike's minutes in half, and Rudy's by a bit. Good points on NOP not liking this deal though.

[minimus]

By giving Murphy an extension (and not giving extension to Ingram) NOP confirmed that he is part of their core. Also I don't see NOP trading both. Also Herb Jones and McDaniels are too similar.

I am big Murphy fan, but trading both our best defenders PoA McDaniels and NAW doesn't make sense

My thought process is we have to choose between NAW and DD. DD might be slightly better and cheaper. Also, this allows us to cut Mike's minutes in half, and Rudy's by a bit. Good points on NOP not liking this deal though.

It feels like Conley is the weakest point in current guard rotation. It sounds sad, but at this point I'd completely disregard his minutes for next season. It means that if TC trades NAW AND dont find a capable PG, then we will have only DDV and Dillingham as ballhanders. It is for sure too short rotation for a good team.

[cmoss84]

By giving Murphy an extension (and not giving extension to Ingram) NOP confirmed that he is part of their core. Also I don't see NOP trading both. Also Herb Jones and McDaniels are too similar.

I am big Murphy fan, but trading both our best defenders PoA McDaniels and NAW doesn't make sense

My thought process is we have to choose between NAW and DD. DD might be slightly better and cheaper. Also, this allows us to cut Mike's minutes in half, and Rudy's by a bit. Good points on NOP not liking this deal though.

It feels like Conley is the weakest point in current guard rotation. It sounds sad, but at this point I'd completely disregard his minutes for next season. It means that if TC trades NAW AND dont find a capable PG, then we will have only DDV and Dillingham as ballhanders. It is for sure too short rotation for a good team.

You obviously didn't watch NAZ and Rudy's ball handling skills last night

[winforlose]

My thought process is we have to choose between NAW and DD. DD might be slightly better and cheaper. Also, this allows us to cut Mike's minutes in half, and Rudy's by a bit. Good points on NOP not liking this deal though.

It feels like Conley is the weakest point in current guard rotation. It sounds sad, but at this point I'd completely disregard his minutes for next season. It means that if TC trades NAW AND dont find a capable PG, then we will have only DDV and Dillingham as ballhanders. It is for sure too short rotation for a good team.

You obviously didn't watch NAZ and Rudy's ball handling skills last night

18 turnovers, 10 from Ant and Randle, 8 for everyone else combined.

[TheZachAttack]

I did some thought experiments on the Wolves scenarios before the trade deadline. The assumptions that I have are:

1. If we trade Randle we will have to attach the Detroit pick to get off of his salary. You likely are looking to find a player like NAW or Vanderbilt who is buried on teams depth charts and develop them rather than a player who is part of a teams core.
2. If Randle opts in we will lose one of Naw or Naz (likely Naw)
3. The current roster as currently constructed is not a championship contender. The Wolves will likely (1) finish just outside the play-in (2) be a play in team and lose (3) be a play in team and win (4) be just inside of the play in line. In this world, this pick is likely to be in the 10-16 range.
4. Detroit's pick is likely to convey this year or next year (this year protected through pick 13 and next year 11)
5. Minnesota has it's FRP in 2026 (it's a pick swap), but we will likely finish with a better record than the Jazz whose rebuild is going poorly
6. Minnesota likes players like Rob, Shannon Jr, Minott, and Leonard Miller and would like a chance to find rotation minutes for some of them to develop them.

In this world, if the pick conveys this year... there's a pretty high chance the pick we get back is picking in a pretty similar range to what we would pick this year. If next year, then the Wolves are likely looking at a pick in the 12-18 range.

This means that if we trade Randle this year, we will likely lose the Detroit pick and you're likely getting back players who are similar to Shannon Jr and Minott and Miller. In this world, I think it makes sense to hold onto Randle as I don't think the Wolves have a roster that can contend for a championship in either scenario.

This means that the initial thing that happens in the offseason is Randle opting in or out. The Wolves probably have more information and a better feel for what Randle will do then we do. I do think that Randle needs/wants a long-term contract and more guaranteed money. In this world, I think it's actually not a surefire decision that Randle opts in even if he can't get more than the 33m he is currently being paid. If Randle plays another year in a situation where he's not a good fit and his stats aren't maximized, the type of contract he could get at 32 coming off of 2 years of seasons where there's a lot of negative headlines of Randle could cost him a good amount of money on his next contract.

If he does sign, I think the Wolves will lose NAW. I do think Randle's contract as an expiring deal is much easier to move next year at the trade deadline or in the season as an expiring asset. I am also not sure if we can sign Randle and he can opt in and then we can trade him before we make the decision on Naw/Naz.

If he doesn't sign I think the Wolves will have to make a decision on Naw. In my opinion, I think it's likely they bring him back although some others have said maybe they should not. I think the Wolves will be looking to create rotation minutes for Rob and at least one of Miller/Shannon Jr/Minott.

This means that the Wolves will either have 1 mid 1st this year and 1 next year -- or 2 mid first round picks next year. In addition, next year if we take a little bit of a step back to take a step forward we could potentially have a higher pick.

I think it makes sense to hold onto Randle unless you can make a trade with him that nets you a similar type of player to Randle who might be a better fit (i.e. Ingram). Or hold on Randle and play things out in this way. I think the Wolves will be able to draft a ball-handler in the middle of the first round this year or go after one depending on how things play out with either NAW's salary slot or the MLE if Randle opts out.

If he opts in, then I think there will be opportunities to move off of Randle's expiring and you are in a situation in which Conley/Randle's expiring will move 44m off the cap books. I think the best case scenario for building a team around Ant's development even if we aren't a championship contender is Randle opting out. And then getting to extend Naz and make decisions with the MLE, about 15m of cap space, and the potential FRP about how to get more spacing and ball handling onto the roster.

If he opts in, I think you can get there as well. And I think that Rudy/Conley aging and Randle expiring will help you not feel like you have to play them as much. This actually makes me pretty optimistic and I think holding onto the Detroit FRP is really key. In a worst case, they don't have it this year and next year they can really find time for Rob, Shannon Jr, Naz, and Minott.

One other note on Conley, since 11/12 (24 games) Conley is shooting 39.6% from 3 and averaging 4 assists in 25 mpg. I think Conley is actually fine, but just not when we have to rely on him as much as we do. He should be a stabilizer off the bench and not someone who is as key to the roster as he is now.

[Rookie-Mistake]

We need to trade Julius.
He is clearly just playing for himself and a new contract.


Sent from my SM-G991B using RealGM mobile app

[TheZachAttack]

We need to trade Julius.
He is clearly just playing for himself and a new contract.


Sent from my SM-G991B using RealGM mobile app

It’s not worth losing the Detroit pick

[Rookie-Mistake]

Surely there is a way of getting rid of him without losing the pick..

Sent from my SM-G991B using RealGM mobile app

[TheZachAttack]

Surely there is a way of getting rid of him without losing the pick..

Sent from my SM-G991B using RealGM mobile app

I doubt it, why would anyone want him and his contract without taking on a positive asset.

[winforlose]

Surely there is a way of getting rid of him without losing the pick..

Sent from my SM-G991B using RealGM mobile app

I doubt it, why would anyone want him and his contract without taking on a positive asset.

His numbers are positive, he is a multi time all star, multi time all NBA, and a good iso scorer. Plenty of teams would want him. The question is what we need to take back.

[TheZachAttack]

Surely there is a way of getting rid of him without losing the pick..

Sent from my SM-G991B using RealGM mobile app

I doubt it, why would anyone want him and his contract without taking on a positive asset.

His numbers are positive, he is a multi time all star, multi time all NBA, and a good iso scorer. Plenty of teams would want him. The question is what we need to take back.

I don’t see it at all. I think you are either taking on a similar player to Randle and a similar contract or it’s purely a salary move. And in almost all cases you’re likely giving up some combo of the Detroit FRP and Minott/Shannon Jr/Leonard Miller. Who wants him?

In most cases if these teams want to trade or move off of something they can get something better back. Maybe New Orleans with Ingram or Zion? I think that only works if New Orleans has decided to also move off Zion, either to us or to another team. And Zion would come with its own issues… same with signing Ingram.

Other bad teams don’t want to move off of whatever positive assets they have for Randle. They want futures of some sort. What team would want him?