What Makes Andrew Wiggins Neutral?

[Buzzard]

Wiggins would get 14 - 20 in free agency. Prince got 14 million or so starting and then their is the crazy side with Harrison Barnes getting 24 million starting.

I would not take Wiggins on for anything less than two mid first coming back. Its simple math. Crabbe got one first; so Wiggins at almost twice the cost per season should bring at least two picks.

[HartfordWhalers]

It sounds like warrrior fans are tired of the board's take that the deal was a mistake and they should try to get out of it.

I don't have the deal as a mistake, and didn't at the time. Remember they got off Dlo.

Spoiler:

If I say GS won this, how vilified will I become here?

Love the idea of Wiggins rim running with Klay and Curry, love the idea of the pick upside, love the idea of getting off DLO.

I do think it fully makes a mockery of all the "We didn't get DLO to trade him' bs that some people bought full line and sinker.

Yep, I'm the one GS vote.

Edit: Okay 1 of 2 now.

The productivity gap between Russell and Wiggins next season should be interesting.

Etc...

https://forums.realgm.com/boards/viewtopic.php?p=81589491#p81589491

https://forums.realgm.com/boards/viewtopic.php?p=81590484#p81590484

https://forums.realgm.com/boards/viewtopic.php?p=81590733#p81590733

https://forums.realgm.com/boards/viewtopic.php?p=81593838#p81593838

[100proof]

1. I honestly see it being someone biting and offering just over the MLE. I'm going to say $11 Million a year. Averaging out the remaining three years of Wiggins contract is about $31.5 Million a year. That's $20.5 Million extra over 3 years which is about $61 Million total.

2. So let's say the Allen Crabbe formula. The other first was for Taurean Prince, but 17th Overall dumped Crabbe's $18 Million contract. That pretty much makes it just over 3 mid-first round picks just to make Wiggins neutral.

Something like...

Felicio, Young, Satoransky and 4 for Wiggins and 2 is a good place to start. Using the Luka/Trae and Tatum/Fultz examples even if you low ball the 2020 draft, you're at least making up 2 of those mid-firsts by moving out of the top 3 in this draft. You add your own lottery protected 2021 first round draft pick and Eric Paschall and I think you're there.

Again, this is not suggesting the Warriors SHOULD do this, just what gets him neutral.

Felicio, Young, Satoransky and 4 for Wiggins, Paschall and 2021 Lottery Protected Warriors 1st is neutral IMO

Then the Warriors can trade their expirings, TPE, 4 and/or T'Wolves 1st for whatever talent they want without weighing down the value with Wiggins.

That is too high of a value on Wiggins dead weight of a contract.

Sato, Young are non guaranteed next season (iirc) that means that GSW would be getting full expiring AND only moving down 2 places.


To turn Wiggins into an expiring it will cost #2. period. 65 million dollars savings for GSW. That means, basically, a team is paying 65 million dollars to buy pick #2 in this very flat draft.

To bring back a player that will be useful to GSW at the same time and still save them money SHOULD cost them more. For example Hayward, Dumping Wiggins for ayward SHOULD cost them more than just the number 2. Because Boston is paying 65 million in salary (plus the lux tax implications will add another 20+ million to that) they would be wanting the Minny pick as well.

GSW made a really bad move by making that deal for Wiggins. Minny paid an UNPROTECTED first rounder to trade for Russell. In fact Warrior Management refused the deal a number of times before the trade.

I get why GSW did the sign and trade for Russell in the first place, to get an asset for losing Durant, but now are screwed and are going to have to pay to fix it.

[100proof]

Wiggins in the open Market, especially this new Covid one, is worth 12-13 million per season.

He is a high usage player (27%+ last year) that put him in the range of guys like Tatum, Siakam, Towns, Russell, Davis and only a couple percentage points behind Lebron and mitchell.

No way a that 1) that Wiggins is a top 4 player on a championship team or 2) Wiggins an impactful player on lower usage.

Using the Celtics for an example for usage ratings
1-Tatum 28%
2- Kemba 26.5
3 - Brown 24
4 - Hayward 20
5 - Smart 18

Who does Wiggins jump in the pecking order there?

Lets dive into it another step.
Wiggins 27% usage, 19.5 points, 4.5 rebouds. 3.5 assists.
per usage% that breaks down:

0.73 points per usage%
0.17 rebounds per usage%
0.13 assists per usage%
44%fg
33%3pt

Lets look at 2 other players:

a)
0.69 points per usage%
0.21 rebounds per usage%
0.27 assists per usage%
38%fg
35%3pt

b)
0.70 points per usage%
0.17 rebounds per usage%
0.07 assists per usage%
40%fg
35%3pt

Both of these players give you similar raw production numbers to Wiggins. Player B has far superior passing and rebounding, similar scoring, better 3pt shooting worse fg shooting. Player B has very similar scoring output, equal rebounding, lesser passing, superior 3pt shooting, less fg%.

Player A makes 13.4 this next season and 14.4 after that, is a 2 time NBA all defense first team. Marcus Smart
Player B makes 13.5, 12.5, 11.5. Its Terrence Ross.

Wiggins should be in line with making what these 2 guys earn based on production alone. In fact Smart should be higher than Wiggins due to smart being ALL NBA while producing similarly offensively to Wiggins. And Ross and Smart both signed their contracts BEFORE the massive revenue loss.

If Wiggins was a free agent and signing a contract this offseason, no team should pay him more than 10-11 million a season.

So lets say 3 years 36 million to be generous.
He is currently under contract for 3 years 95 million.

That is almost 3 times more than what he is worth.

So again, trading an expiring contract for just Wiggins and #2 means that a team is spending 60 million dollars to buy pick number 2 in a flat draft.

For some team that 60 million dollar pricetag will be higher due to Tax, and for GSW it would be saving them FAR MORE than 60 million dollars because of the cost of the number 2 pick, as well as their own lux tax savings.


Warriors trading wiggins and #2 for an expiring contract would save them well over 100 million.

[Texas Chuck]

What he should get and would get are two different things .

Bingo. He's still relatively young, he's athletic, he's durable, he's a volume scorer, if a mediocre one, he was the first overall pick and while it shouldn't matter this far into his career of course it does.

So he probably would get overpaid to the tune of 4/$60M or so. But what is his actual value? I'd have it definitely less than the MLE. He's not good enough to be a primary or secondary scorer on a good team and he doesn't do enough other things to slide into a smaller role on a good team(Warriors fans will see this if he doesn't get traded btw) and so the only place for him is to score points on bad teams. And that's just not very valuable.

[Texas Chuck]

Honestly the boards just need to stop including Wiggins in trades.

As long as the conversation is civil, I don't understand why you should object to discussions about Wiggins.

.

Don't worry despite multiple attempts to do so, he does not get to control the discussion. As I tell any poster who complains about deals they don't like involving specific players--just don't open the thread. It shouldn't impact him in any way if others discuss the topic.

[100proof]

What he should get and would get are two different things .

Bingo. He's still relatively young, he's athletic, he's durable, he's a volume scorer, if a mediocre one, he was the first overall pick and while it shouldn't matter this far into his career of course it does.

So he probably would get overpaid to the tune of 4/$60M or so. But what is his actual value? I'd have it definitely less than the MLE. He's not good enough to be a primary or secondary scorer on a good team and he doesn't do enough other things to slide into a smaller role on a good team(Warriors fans will see this if he doesn't get traded btw) and so the only place for him is to score points on bad teams. And that's just not very valuable.

3/36 - 4/60

In that range. I think we are on the same idea for valuation of his contract.

[Nate the Great]

I just hope this doesn’t reignite the “Wiggins and picks for garbage players my team wants to dump” trade pattern that was so prevalent here for awhile. That got pretty boring.

[Commodor]

Why? There are few rumours of any player moving and they are mentioned every day. Turner, gordon. Hayward, Dipo- sorry one story,
Collins, Jrue, Horford, Posters look at a player's situation and to their mind it isn't very tenable. You have rumors of the warriors wanting a starter for the 2nd pick, are we to limit the players going back to just the Warrior TPE?

It sounds like warrrior fans are tired of the board's take that the deal was a mistake and they should try to get out of it.

Yet again, receiving an "it's obvious!" as the only reasoning.

I just want a coherent argument if Wiggins will be included in a trade idea. The standard "GSW should move him because he is bad and expensive" is a bad take, plain and simple. They have zero money issues and are looking to increase their spending ability. They need his salary number on the cap sheet if they want to upgrade the position ever, so trading him for an expiring contract also does not make sense. It makes it impossible for them to fill the SF position with anything other than exemptions down the road. The "too expensive" take is probably the worst justification.

As for his ability yes he is not ideal, but GSW fans are not trying to say he is all of a sudden PG. The issue is, they have no SF alternates at the moment, so dumping him (and picks) for bad fits makes no sense either if they want to compete, which they do. That eliminates most Wiggins for old-overpaid center takes or Wiggins for random role players. If they pay with picks to move him they have no way of upgrading the position, and in a division with Lebron, Kawhi and PG you need bodies at SF.

Here's seven different articles where GSW coaches and execs are quoted as to why they are excited about Wiggins. His fit is astronomically better than Russell's was, he has never had a culture to help him flourish like GSW's, and by all accounts this last year even before he come to GSW he was showing improvements in his game. At 25 that's the type of risk you take, especially when money is not the issue.

https://www.nbcsports.com/bayarea/warriors/andrew-wiggins-one-warriors-core-four-players-bob-myers-says

https://sports.yahoo.com/warriors-eager-see-andrew-wiggins-041129748.html

https://www.nbcsports.com/bayarea/warriors/what-kirk-lacob-cares-about-most-andrew-wiggins-warriors-role

https://www.essentiallysports.com/basketball-nba-news-hes-a-damn-good-player-steve-kerr-sings-high-praise-for-golden-state-warriors-talent-andrew-wiggins/

https://bluemanhoop.com/2020/07/16/warriors-rumors-steve-kerr-loves-andrew-wiggins/

https://bluemanhoop.com/2020/05/16/reasons-warriors-trade-andrew-wiggins/5/

https://www.goldenstateofmind.com/2020/4/10/21215802/lacob-likes-wiggins-fit-with-warriors

Waiting on one from you or anyone else pointing that GSW wants dump salary at the expense of picks.

[HartfordWhalers]

So again, trading an expiring contract for just Wiggins and #2 means that a team is spending 60 million dollars to buy pick number 2 in a flat draft.

Assuming that is the case, I think it is a good deal for a rebuilding team.

15m -20m? gets you maybe a pick at 20-25 area usually.

Would much rather have 2 than 3 mid/late 1sts. Even this year.

[shrink]

Here's seven different articles where GSW coaches and execs are quoted as to why they are excited about Wiggins. His fit is astronomically better than Russell's was...

And guess what? You could find seven different articles saying how excited they were about getting Russell too. They would say things like, “don’t worry about his fit with Curry,” and “Look what a great offball guard he is!” Did you apply the same standard last year, and use this as evidence that Russell wouldn’t be traded?

I think you are drinking the Koolade a bit on Wiggins, now that he is wearing a Warriors uniform.

[100proof]

So again, trading an expiring contract for just Wiggins and #2 means that a team is spending 60 million dollars to buy pick number 2 in a flat draft.

Assuming that is the case, I think it is a good deal for a rebuilding team.

15m -20m? gets you maybe a pick at 20-25 area usually.

Would much rather have 2 than 3 mid/late 1sts. Even this year.

I do not disagree, but what rebuilding teams have an expiring to give for that package, and which of those expirings are viable players for the Warriors?

Not many, imo.

[Texas Chuck]

It's a fake narrative that people are saying the Warriors should pay to dump Wiggins. Literally nobody is posting ideas like that.

What people are saying is even the Warriors have a budget. And so instead of having Wiggins mostly dead money on the cap they are better served using assets to turn him into more useful players.

The disconnect is some like Commodor think Wiggins plus the picks should return a star whereas most of the rest us do not believe that to be possible and that they already have a superstar in Steph and two very good supporting stars in Draymond and Klay and thus getting just good basketball players who do supporting things is smarter than just playing Wiggins cuz well we need a SF. Nobody needs just a SF. They need players who help.

[NoZoLakers]

21 Minn pick n taking back a salary just as big as wiggins that goes out further but is also a better player than Wiggins

[gswhoops]

It's a fake narrative that people are saying the Warriors should pay to dump Wiggins. Literally nobody is posting ideas like that.

Maybe fanbases are just talking past each other here. You're correct that we haven't seen Wiggins + assets for nothing (at least, not very often). But we have seen a TON of deals where GS is paying a large premium over what their return is worth in a vacuum because "we get to dump Wiggins."

In my eyes, that's paying to dump Wiggins.

[Texas Chuck]

It's a fake narrative that people are saying the Warriors should pay to dump Wiggins. Literally nobody is posting ideas like that.

Maybe fanbases are just talking past each other here. You're correct that we haven't seen Wiggins + assets for nothing (at least, not very often). But we have seen a TON of deals where GS is paying a large premium over what their return is worth in a vacuum because "we get to dump Wiggins."

In my eyes, that's paying to dump Wiggins.

That's the normal value disagreement that a fanbase is going to have with one of their players versus the group though right? Just like Bulls fans value LaVine more, Sixers fans value Horford more, Cavs fans value Love more, what have you. Nobody sees their bad contract as bad as everyone else see it.

But there is a very fundamental difference in us disagreeing on value and what Commodor is insisting is happening. We can always argue on value. And we can always make the assumption that home fans are going to value players more. Doesn't make them homers, just makes them humans.

[patman66]

Why? There are few rumours of any player moving and they are mentioned every day. Turner, gordon. Hayward, Dipo- sorry one story,
Collins, Jrue, Horford, Posters look at a player's situation and to their mind it isn't very tenable. You have rumors of the warriors wanting a starter for the 2nd pick, are we to limit the players going back to just the Warrior TPE?

It sounds like warrrior fans are tired of the board's take that the deal was a mistake and they should try to get out of it.

Yet again, receiving an "it's obvious!" as the only reasoning.

I just want a coherent argument if Wiggins will be included in a trade idea. The standard "GSW should move him because he is bad and expensive" is a bad take, plain and simple. They have zero money issues and are looking to increase their spending ability. They need his salary number on the cap sheet if they want to upgrade the position ever, so trading him for an expiring contract also does not make sense. It makes it impossible for them to fill the SF position with anything other than exemptions down the road. The "too expensive" take is probably the worst justification.

As for his ability yes he is not ideal, but GSW fans are not trying to say he is all of a sudden PG. The issue is, they have no SF alternates at the moment, so dumping him (and picks) for bad fits makes no sense either if they want to compete, which they do. That eliminates most Wiggins for old-overpaid center takes or Wiggins for random role players. If they pay with picks to move him they have no way of upgrading the position, and in a division with Lebron, Kawhi and PG you need bodies at SF.

Here's seven different articles where GSW coaches and execs are quoted as to why they are excited about Wiggins. His fit is astronomically better than Russell's was, he has never had a culture to help him flourish like GSW's, and by all accounts this last year even before he come to GSW he was showing improvements in his game. At 25 that's the type of risk you take, especially when money is not the issue.

https://www.nbcsports.com/bayarea/warriors/andrew-wiggins-one-warriors-core-four-players-bob-myers-says

https://sports.yahoo.com/warriors-eager-see-andrew-wiggins-041129748.html

https://www.nbcsports.com/bayarea/warriors/what-kirk-lacob-cares-about-most-andrew-wiggins-warriors-role

https://www.essentiallysports.com/basketball-nba-news-hes-a-damn-good-player-steve-kerr-sings-high-praise-for-golden-state-warriors-talent-andrew-wiggins/

https://bluemanhoop.com/2020/07/16/warriors-rumors-steve-kerr-loves-andrew-wiggins/

https://bluemanhoop.com/2020/05/16/reasons-warriors-trade-andrew-wiggins/5/

https://www.goldenstateofmind.com/2020/4/10/21215802/lacob-likes-wiggins-fit-with-warriors

Waiting on one from you or anyone else pointing that GSW wants dump salary at the expense of picks.

Then don't. ainge could tell me all day that he is happy going with a certain marginal position/player and I take it with a grain of salt. If they are talking to the media they are lying. Why the hell are they going to tip thier hand one way or another. I mean if Kerr and curry go on TV and swears on a stack of bibles that he will quit if Wiggins is traded, then I will forgo posting on threads about Wiggins till then, everything is a smoke screen.

[gswhoops]

It's a fake narrative that people are saying the Warriors should pay to dump Wiggins. Literally nobody is posting ideas like that.

Maybe fanbases are just talking past each other here. You're correct that we haven't seen Wiggins + assets for nothing (at least, not very often). But we have seen a TON of deals where GS is paying a large premium over what their return is worth in a vacuum because "we get to dump Wiggins."

In my eyes, that's paying to dump Wiggins.

That's the normal value disagreement that a fanbase is going to have with one of their players versus the group though right? Just like Bulls fans value LaVine more, Sixers fans value Horford more, Cavs fans value Love more, what have you. Nobody sees their bad contract as bad as everyone else see it.

But there is a very fundamental difference in us disagreeing on value and what Commodor is insisting is happening. We can always argue on value. And we can always make the assumption that home fans are going to value players more. Doesn't make them homers, just makes them humans.

Maybe it's just a semantic difference then (or maybe I'm just being a pedant ).

I agree with you that I don't remember seeing a lot of pure dumps. But obviously there have been a lot of Wiggins + picks for other teams' disposable depth players or ill-fitting vets, and one of the primary drivers of the rationale for the Warriors was dumping Wiggins.

[HartfordWhalers]

So again, trading an expiring contract for just Wiggins and #2 means that a team is spending 60 million dollars to buy pick number 2 in a flat draft.

Assuming that is the case, I think it is a good deal for a rebuilding team.

15m -20m? gets you maybe a pick at 20-25 area usually.

Would much rather have 2 than 3 mid/late 1sts. Even this year.

I do not disagree, but what rebuilding teams have an expiring to give for that package, and which of those expirings are viable players for the Warriors?

Not many, imo.

I think finding an expiring is easier than finding one the Warriors would accept. It gets to the point Chuck is talking about above.

Ignore that GS would/might say no...
Would Detroit do Snell for Wiggins and #2? I think so.
I think Chicago would do Porter for Wiggins and #2.
I think #2 and Wiggins for Fournier gets pretty interesting actually.

But yeah, I think there isn't an issue getting expirings for Wiggins and #2... if GS wanted to do that.

[HartfordWhalers]

Assuming that is the case, I think it is a good deal for a rebuilding team.

15m -20m? gets you maybe a pick at 20-25 area usually.

Would much rather have 2 than 3 mid/late 1sts. Even this year.

I do not disagree, but what rebuilding teams have an expiring to give for that package, and which of those expirings are viable players for the Warriors?

Not many, imo.

I think finding an expiring is easier than finding one the Warriors would accept. It gets to the point Chuck is talking about above.

Ignore that GS would/might say no...
Would Detroit do Snell for Wiggins and #2? I think so.
I think Chicago would do Porter for Wiggins and #2.
I think #2 and Wiggins for Fournier gets pretty interesting actually.

But yeah, I think there isn't an issue getting expirings for Wiggins and #2... if GS wanted to do that.

I also find a Cory Joseph/Bjelica/Holmes for Wiggins and #2 interesting. But I forgot my flame proof pants so I made sure not to post it.