Would Warriors have cap space if...

[kingcong95]

It's a significant change. LeBron and Bosh wanted 5 year maxes with ETO before the last year. This wouldn't have been allowed had they signed with Miami directly, so Miami had no leverage and was forced to give up those picks. When the CBA was redrawn in 2017, this is no longer allowed; under no circumstance would KD have been able to get a 5 year contract with Brooklyn. So there's no incentive for them to give us something back, even a TPE, in that case; the dummy 1st we actually gave them wouldn't have moved the needle at all.

[The Maestro]

Yeah, we couldn’t get a $35 mil TPE from Brooklyn. Wasn’t happening.

[xdrta+]

We wouldn't have been hardcapped, which would have opened up use of the MLE

I don't follow you about the MLE. The Warriors used about $4M of the $5.7M Taxpayer MLE. If they used any more than the TP MLE, $5.7M, they would be hardcapped again.

[Scoots1994]

Myers could have gotten a TPE worth $35M and kept iguoadala. He wouldn't have been hardcapped either and wouldn't have surrendered a picks in either deal

so they would have entered the offseason:

$35M TPE
keep two of our own firsts
keep Iguodala
no hardcap
able to use the TPMLE

With the TPE you could do the REVERSE of what we actually did, which was take on money that was unwanted, or used the firsts we still have to trade to acquire good players

then signed a role player with the MLE

retained Iguodala OR traded him to MIA ourselves (or anywhere else

Basically it would have opened up a multitude of possibilities

and had Steph still gotten hurt, we would still have tank ability and MORE flexibility

Remember that tax concerns and the hardcap is why we had to play the 10-day/2-way game

Hell, we could have eaten Wiggins outright (into the TPE) and leveraged MIN for more pix

i mean the OP could have looked very easily at a number of free databases to answer his original question

but whateves

Don't know how the Warriors turn KD into a TPE, can you detail how that would work in your mind.

the same way it works anytime you do a sign and trade to send your FA into a cap space team?

MIA did it in 2010.

Twice

With Lebron James and Chris bosh

https://www.nba.com/cavaliers/news/trade_100710.html#:~:text=CLEVELAND%2C%20OH%20%2D%20July%2010%2C,Manager%20Chris%20Grant%20announced%20today.

https://www.nba.com/cavaliers/news/trade_100710.html#:~:text=CLEVELAND%2C%20OH%20%2D%20July%2010%2C,Manager%20Chris%20Grant%20announced%20today.

Toronto actually got TWO FIRST ROUNDERS for sending bosh away in the deal

The rules have changed a bit since then, but thats the idea

Right, so it's not KD to TPE, it's KD and other assets for a TPE, and the Warriors picks have a pretty low value so it may take more than 2 to get that deal done and with the rules about not trading consecutive 1st round picks it makes them worth even less. Also dealing DLo helped Brooklyn's PR department from having to deal with "losing him for nothing".

I still think turning KD, who was leaving regardless, Iguodala who was washed, and a hopefully low 1st in 4 years, into a salary slot, 1 likely good first round pick, and Wiggins who could still pay off.

[OptionZero]

you make it sound like we would have had to give up unprotected firsts to get a TPE

BKN did a s/t Russel to us with a protected 2020 pick (converts to seconds). Using that same pick would have gotten it done - makes no diff to BKN whether we're getting russell or a tpe

You say Iguodala was washed but we got double **** on that one. We spent a pick to MOVE him, which wouldn't have been necessary. We would have kept that pick (202014) AND had iguodala, who we KNOW had value because he returned Justice winslow. Whether we got winslow or something else, we could have profited there too

Its insane to prefer dlo to the other path

[xdrta+]

you make it sound like we would have had to give up unprotected firsts to get a TPE

BKN did a s/t Russel to us with a protected 2020 pick (converts to seconds). Using that same pick would have gotten it done - makes no diff to BKN whether we're getting russell or a tpe

You say Iguodala was washed but we got double **** on that one. We spent a pick to MOVE him, which wouldn't have been necessary. We would have kept that pick (202014) AND had iguodala, who we KNOW had value because he returned Justice winslow. Whether we got winslow or something else, we could have profited there too

Its insane to prefer dlo to the other path

What do you see Bkn giving us for Durant. It's a trade, they have to trade something.

[ILOVEIT]

Warriors didn't trade to keep DLO. They (and most of the league) knew the Wolves wanted him so Warriors picked him up with no intension of keeping him. They got a SF which they needed and a protected lottery pick.

Try to keep up.

Iggy doesn't help the Warriors at all this last year...probably hurts the lottery position. As it turns out they could bring him or a guy =< his value with the TPE (loss of a second pick...eh).

Insisting that we are insane for not preferring a ridiculous option of a 35mil TPE that Warriors were never going to get (without trading SOMETHING of value)….now that is insane.

Warriors added a SF, which they needed IMO, plus a protected lottery pick (book it...Wolves will continue to suck next year) which has value.

Warriors are going into 2021 season with a lottery pick, a new super athletic SF (Harrison Barnes 2.0), MLE and TPE and a tradeable lottery pick for next year.

F-cking brilliant result considering injuries and for a team otherwise capped (minus the 35 TPE concept) out with the loss of Durant.

[GQ Hot Dog]

You're right, I lost track of your argument there. I don't know why Brooklyn would do it though, if they're going to use cap space, they could just sign him outright. If they don't use cap space, they would have to send out salary.

My question is why would the Warriors value a $35mil trade exception more than Russell? The difference between Russell and Wiggins was a lightly protected 1st and a 2nd in next year's draft from a team that's been treadmilling or worse for years. The Wolves took a huge gamble with this trade.

Even if a KD trade exception gets us Wiggins it assuredly doesn't get us the pick next year and otherwise I don't see any superstars waiting to be offloaded into an exception right now.

Did you not read any thing i wrote?

We wouldn't have been hardcapped, which would have opened up use of the MLE

A TPE is WAY WAY WAY more flexible than the 5 year max we gave Dlo . . . because in case you didn't notice, we weren't exactly getting blown away with offers for Dlo when we had him. Hell, we ended up taking a WORSE contract and getting only 1 first rounder back for our troubles

With the TPE u could EITHER play the asset game and take multiple smaller (but maybe useful!) player contracts and collected picks for our troubles, OR used our own picks to acquire actually good players

We would have kept Iguodala - he's not a bad player, right? And if the tank were on, we could . . . trade him to Miami! or anywhere else that wanted him

If you don't see the possibilities, i dunno man, you weren't paying attention to this offseason and squeezed we were?

Why was being hardcapped a problem? It didn't prohibit us from signing anybody, we finished last so the only players worth having on the roster are young ones that being hardcapped didn't interfere with adding.

There's nobody we could've gotten for the MLE that would have been worth the money under the circumstances of taking a "gap year". MLE level players inevitably are either coming off the bench or your most marginal starter so that money would have been effectively wasted in a lost year. D'lo turning into Wiggins is a way better add than any MLE level player.

Because we couldn't have gotten Wiggins with only a TPE. TPE's are worth very little, good for maybe an overpaid bench player, but I'm sure you're aware the majority of TPE's expire without being used.

So when you say TPEs are more flexible, they are in that any team can get rid of an undesirable asset with a draft pick, usually a heavily protected 1st, as compensation. But if you think we could have gotten a starting quality player back, absorbed into a KD TPE, that's preposterous.

Under the best circumstances we could have paid Minny probably multiple 1sts to get back Wiggins which they would do to sign D'lo.

There's clearly a misconception floating around that Wiggins is or was a negative asset. You can see it all over the trade board. It's not true. Starting quality players, of which Wiggins no doubt is, aren't given away for nothing even if they're overpaid. The price to get Wiggins was D'lo. I think that's pretty close to an even swap, two starters only a year apart, getting a valuable 1st thrown in was a steal.

Wiggins is a starting quality player with the TWolves and he was badly miscast as a primary offensive option there. With us he'll be utilized properly and I think can become like a CJ McCollum level starter. A 2nd option on a playoff team. Alongside Klay and Steph, a 3rd option on a championship team.

[kingcong95]

My question is why would the Warriors value a $35mil trade exception more than Russell? The difference between Russell and Wiggins was a lightly protected 1st and a 2nd in next year's draft from a team that's been treadmilling or worse for years. The Wolves took a huge gamble with this trade.

Even if a KD trade exception gets us Wiggins it assuredly doesn't get us the pick next year and otherwise I don't see any superstars waiting to be offloaded into an exception right now.

Did you not read any thing i wrote?

We wouldn't have been hardcapped, which would have opened up use of the MLE

A TPE is WAY WAY WAY more flexible than the 5 year max we gave Dlo . . . because in case you didn't notice, we weren't exactly getting blown away with offers for Dlo when we had him. Hell, we ended up taking a WORSE contract and getting only 1 first rounder back for our troubles

With the TPE u could EITHER play the asset game and take multiple smaller (but maybe useful!) player contracts and collected picks for our troubles, OR used our own picks to acquire actually good players

We would have kept Iguodala - he's not a bad player, right? And if the tank were on, we could . . . trade him to Miami! or anywhere else that wanted him

If you don't see the possibilities, i dunno man, you weren't paying attention to this offseason and squeezed we were?

Why was being hardcapped a problem? It didn't prohibit us from signing anybody, we finished last so the only players worth having on the roster are young ones that being hardcapped didn't interfere with adding.

There's nobody we could've gotten for the MLE that would have been worth the money under the circumstances of taking a "gap year". MLE level players inevitably are either coming off the bench or your most marginal starter so that money would have been effectively wasted in a lost year. D'lo turning into Wiggins is a way better add than any MLE level player.

Because we couldn't have gotten Wiggins with only a TPE. TPE's are worth very little, good for maybe an overpaid bench player, but I'm sure you're aware the majority of TPE's expire without being used.

So when you say TPEs are more flexible, they are in that any team can get rid of an undesirable asset with a draft pick, usually a heavily protected 1st, as compensation. But if you think we could have gotten a starting quality player back, absorbed into a KD TPE, that's preposterous.

Under the best circumstances we could have paid Minny probably multiple 1sts to get back Wiggins which they would do to sign D'lo.

There's clearly a misconception floating around that Wiggins is or was a negative asset. You can see it all over the trade board. It's not true. Starting quality players, of which Wiggins no doubt is, aren't given away for nothing even if they're overpaid. The price to get Wiggins was D'lo. I think that's pretty close to an even swap, two starters only a year apart, getting a valuable 1st thrown in was a steal.

Wiggins is a starting quality player with the TWolves and he was badly miscast as a primary offensive option there. With us he'll be utilized properly and I think can become like a CJ McCollum level starter. A 2nd option on a playoff team. Alongside Klay and Steph, a 3rd option on a championship team.

Yes, I agree that another option would have been to take back Wiggins and the two 2021 picks directly for KD.
GSW in: Wiggins, 2021 MIN 1st (if not top 3, else 2022 unprotected), 2021 MIN 2nd
GSW out: KD

MIN in: DLO, Graham, Napier (salaries guaranteed), 3.6M cash to cover Graham and Napier's salaries
MIN out: Wiggins, 2021 top 3 protected 1st, 2021 2nd, 2024 lotto protected 1st (Wiggins' value was lower at this time so it costs them another pick, in lieu of the 2025 pick the Warriors actually sent out)

BKN in: KD, 2024 MIN 1st (if not lotto, else 2024 and 2025 2nd)
BKN out: DLO, Graham, Napier, 3.6M cash

The Dubs do NOT get hardcapped, which means they don't have to worry about injuries reducing their roster to 8 healthy players. They also don't have to dump Iggy and can keep their 3.6M cash, 2024 1st and 2025 2nd, and also trade Iggy for a fair price (I couldn't care less right now whether it was Winslow or otherwise). They also receive a 5.2M trade exception, that's the difference between KD's base year salary and Wiggins' salary. The Nets and Wolves don't get one because they are both taking back more money.

There are a couple reasons why this didn't happen in real life. I heard that DLO picked us at first, because the Wolves were not prepared to offer him his full max; this deal would have solved that problem for them. It is us, however, who would most likely have said no at that time; taking on Wiggins' underwater contract, no matter how good the picks are, is the kind of move associated with rebuilding, and Lacob and Myers certainly didn't want that kind of perception around us just over losing KD.

[OptionZero]

My question is why would the Warriors value a $35mil trade exception more than Russell? The difference between Russell and Wiggins was a lightly protected 1st and a 2nd in next year's draft from a team that's been treadmilling or worse for years. The Wolves took a huge gamble with this trade.

Even if a KD trade exception gets us Wiggins it assuredly doesn't get us the pick next year and otherwise I don't see any superstars waiting to be offloaded into an exception right now.

Did you not read any thing i wrote?

We wouldn't have been hardcapped, which would have opened up use of the MLE

A TPE is WAY WAY WAY more flexible than the 5 year max we gave Dlo . . . because in case you didn't notice, we weren't exactly getting blown away with offers for Dlo when we had him. Hell, we ended up taking a WORSE contract and getting only 1 first rounder back for our troubles

With the TPE u could EITHER play the asset game and take multiple smaller (but maybe useful!) player contracts and collected picks for our troubles, OR used our own picks to acquire actually good players

We would have kept Iguodala - he's not a bad player, right? And if the tank were on, we could . . . trade him to Miami! or anywhere else that wanted him

If you don't see the possibilities, i dunno man, you weren't paying attention to this offseason and squeezed we were?

Why was being hardcapped a problem? It didn't prohibit us from signing anybody, we finished last so the only players worth having on the roster are young ones that being hardcapped didn't interfere with adding.

There's nobody we could've gotten for the MLE that would have been worth the money under the circumstances of taking a "gap year". MLE level players inevitably are either coming off the bench or your most marginal starter so that money would have been effectively wasted in a lost year. D'lo turning into Wiggins is a way better add than any MLE level player.

Because we couldn't have gotten Wiggins with only a TPE. TPE's are worth very little, good for maybe an overpaid bench player, but I'm sure you're aware the majority of TPE's expire without being used.

So when you say TPEs are more flexible, they are in that any team can get rid of an undesirable asset with a draft pick, usually a heavily protected 1st, as compensation. But if you think we could have gotten a starting quality player back, absorbed into a KD TPE, that's preposterous.

Under the best circumstances we could have paid Minny probably multiple 1sts to get back Wiggins which they would do to sign D'lo.

There's clearly a misconception floating around that Wiggins is or was a negative asset. You can see it all over the trade board. It's not true. Starting quality players, of which Wiggins no doubt is, aren't given away for nothing even if they're overpaid. The price to get Wiggins was D'lo. I think that's pretty close to an even swap, two starters only a year apart, getting a valuable 1st thrown in was a steal.

Wiggins is a starting quality player with the TWolves and he was badly miscast as a primary offensive option there. With us he'll be utilized properly and I think can become like a CJ McCollum level starter. A 2nd option on a playoff team. Alongside Klay and Steph, a 3rd option on a championship team.

You are living in a fantasy world. Sort of amazing how every single thing you said is wrong.

Did you really just suggest we would have SENT firsts to MIN for Wiggins, one of the worst contracts in the league at that point in time ?

I mean . . . i don't know how i talk to you. You are delusional.

We were the worst team in the league this year. That wasn't all injuries - Dlo not being particularly useful even as a floor raiser and our inability to do anything but marginal moves with our roster were significant factors.

Its mindboggling you seem unwilling to accept there were things we could have done differently.

[OptionZero]

We wouldn't have been hardcapped, which would have opened up use of the MLE

I don't follow you about the MLE. The Warriors used about $4M of the $5.7M Taxpayer MLE. If they used any more than the TP MLE, $5.7M, they would be hardcapped again.

Per SPOTRAC:

We used a sliver of the MLE to sign Paschall to a 3 year deal. That wouldn't have changed.
We used another sliver of the MLE to sign Smailagic to a hinkie special. That wouldn't have changed either.

The rest, however:
- Damion Lee
- Juan Tuscano-Anderson
- Ky Bowman
- Mychal Mulder

were all given multi-year deals late in the year. We had to use the MLE to go multiple years IIRC
We also had to wait to do those deals until we had ditched other money and the pro-rated amounts would allow us to dodge the hardcap

If we go back in time to the start of the season, the hardcap would not have given us room to use the full TPMLE

[GQ Hot Dog]

Did you not read any thing i wrote?

We wouldn't have been hardcapped, which would have opened up use of the MLE

A TPE is WAY WAY WAY more flexible than the 5 year max we gave Dlo . . . because in case you didn't notice, we weren't exactly getting blown away with offers for Dlo when we had him. Hell, we ended up taking a WORSE contract and getting only 1 first rounder back for our troubles

With the TPE u could EITHER play the asset game and take multiple smaller (but maybe useful!) player contracts and collected picks for our troubles, OR used our own picks to acquire actually good players

We would have kept Iguodala - he's not a bad player, right? And if the tank were on, we could . . . trade him to Miami! or anywhere else that wanted him

If you don't see the possibilities, i dunno man, you weren't paying attention to this offseason and squeezed we were?

Why was being hardcapped a problem? It didn't prohibit us from signing anybody, we finished last so the only players worth having on the roster are young ones that being hardcapped didn't interfere with adding.

There's nobody we could've gotten for the MLE that would have been worth the money under the circumstances of taking a "gap year". MLE level players inevitably are either coming off the bench or your most marginal starter so that money would have been effectively wasted in a lost year. D'lo turning into Wiggins is a way better add than any MLE level player.

Because we couldn't have gotten Wiggins with only a TPE. TPE's are worth very little, good for maybe an overpaid bench player, but I'm sure you're aware the majority of TPE's expire without being used.

So when you say TPEs are more flexible, they are in that any team can get rid of an undesirable asset with a draft pick, usually a heavily protected 1st, as compensation. But if you think we could have gotten a starting quality player back, absorbed into a KD TPE, that's preposterous.

Under the best circumstances we could have paid Minny probably multiple 1sts to get back Wiggins which they would do to sign D'lo.

There's clearly a misconception floating around that Wiggins is or was a negative asset. You can see it all over the trade board. It's not true. Starting quality players, of which Wiggins no doubt is, aren't given away for nothing even if they're overpaid. The price to get Wiggins was D'lo. I think that's pretty close to an even swap, two starters only a year apart, getting a valuable 1st thrown in was a steal.

Wiggins is a starting quality player with the TWolves and he was badly miscast as a primary offensive option there. With us he'll be utilized properly and I think can become like a CJ McCollum level starter. A 2nd option on a playoff team. Alongside Klay and Steph, a 3rd option on a championship team.

You are living in a fantasy world. Sort of amazing how every single thing you said is wrong.

Did you really just suggest we would have SENT firsts to MIN for Wiggins, one of the worst contracts in the league at that point in time ?

I mean . . . i don't know how i talk to you. You are delusional.

We were the worst team in the league this year. That wasn't all injuries - Dlo not being particularly useful even as a floor raiser and our inability to do anything but marginal moves with our roster were significant factors.

Its mindboggling you seem unwilling to accept there were things we could have done differently.

I'm saying with a KD sized TPE we couldn't have gotten a better player than Wiggins, at least not without paying Westbrook/George levels of compensation which I'm sure we can all agree would be disastrous, and to even get Wiggins would have cost at least 2 first round picks.

The fact that Wiggins is perceived as overpaid, doesn't mean he has negative value. You can't look at all the factors of Wiggins(age, measurables, production, efficiency, cost) and conclude he has no value. Indeed the trade we made nicely sums up his value. He and D'lo are young, starting level players. D'lo is seen as having All-Star potential, although not a perennial All-Star while Wiggins is not seen as someone capable of an All-Star selection. The difference in quality, considering the cost is the same, worked out to a lightly protected 1st and a 2nd.

I'm not saying we couldn't have done anything differently, I'm saying a large TPE wouldn't have resulted in a better player than Wiggins and not for cheaper than what we got Wiggins for. By all means, put a name forward that you think would have been better than Wiggins and for what price. As for Wiggins, do you really think we could have gotten Wiggins for nothing? The Wolves would have been happy just to move on from him receiving nothing in return? It strikes me as delusional. People on RealGM tend to claim such a thing is possible but that's because they're stupid.