Milos Teodosic of Serbia reportedly could be heading to the NBA, and is linked to the Jazz ...
According to Fran Fraschilla:
"Offensively, he's the best passer in the world, ... Now, he will not guard a chair, but he's a brilliant offensive player and an ultra-competitor."
http://www.cbssports.com/nba/news/ut...on-the-market/
Based on some of the other things you say in your post, you clearly know more about NBA wheeling and dealing than I do. But don't teams "sell" their 2nd round picks all the time, if they like their roster and could use the cash? You can't count on franchise-altering talent in the 2nd.
Not to say the Bulls' move you reference was a smart one at the time, but in a vacuum I don't think 2nd-for-cash is outrageously bad.
So new reports are surfacing that we could see Wade and Melo land with the Cavs. I'm my opinion that won't help them compete with the Warriors. I think it just makes them older and slower especially on the defensive end. Offense wasn't really the problem for the Cavs in the finals. What are your thoughts?
Seems unlikely. I can see the Bulls (who are rebuilding) working out a buyout with Wade. At that point, I could see him signing a vet minimum deal with the Cavs. But I am not sure how Carmelo gets to Cleveland.
If it did happen, it certainly doesn't get the Cavs closer to the title. Wade is atrocious defensively these days, and can't shoot. Anthony is a bit better defensively, but is he actually an upgrade over Love?
I haven't seen this rumor anywhere, but it seems like someone just spitballing hypotheticals rather than something actually in the works.
The trade you referenced wasn't an MLB player. It was a minor leaguer in the independent (i.e., not affiliated with MLB) league. I am not sure that I would reference a trade by a cash-strapped independent league team as a comp to one of the most profitable teams in the NBA.
In the NBA, sometimes teams sell late-2nd round picks. This is occasionally done in a weak draft when a team has a maxed-out roster and can't use a guy unlikely to make a roster anyway. Neither applies in this case: the Bulls are now a rebuilding team in need of young talent to fill out the roster; their pick was early in the 2nd round; and this was a very deep draft.
I think in this scenario, both would be buyouts. But like you said, neither is really the defensive upgrade that the Cavs need unless Anthony goes to his Team USA ways once he's on a super team (if he even has enough left in the tank to be that effective). Bench scoring would be more potent, but Paul George really is the ideal addition as a super 2 way player. Not sure if losing Love makes it worth it unless Tristan significantly ups his play. Really wish Bogut hadn't gotten hurt. His rim protection would have been very, very useful. Shumpert is a bad basketball player in general. I'd rather have Korver take his minutes so he can get into a shooting rhythm.
I'm not quite as sanguine on their playoff chances as CDu. I think he's got a bit of homer bias when it comes to Jimmy Butler, who I think is closer to the 15th best player in the league than top 10.
Here's my case: Minnesota was 31-51 last year. They were a young team, with young stars. Give them a year of improvement, and I'll be generous and say they improve 4 games, to 35-47. Does this trade make them 6+ wins better? I think it's hard to say. This team still has a ton of flaws.
First, they are almost just as bad at shooting as the Bulls were last year. At least the Bulls kind of had Mirotic and McDermott. Who's the Wolves go-to shooter? Bjelica? Casspi? Tyus Jones? This team has less perimeter shooting than almost anyone else in the league. Butler can't really shoot, neither can Wiggins, Shabazz, or Rubio. The best shooters they have in their top 7 are Towns (36%) and Dieng (37%). I don't think it's in any team's best interest to have their starting big men spotting up from 3, rather than controlling the paint/glass.
Defensively, does adding Butler help them? Of course, Butler is one of the best defensive players in the league. But can he transform one of the WORST defensive teams (tied with Sacramento for 26th) in the league into a playoff defense in 1 year? I'm skeptical. Towns and Wiggins can only get better defensively, but they have been flat out terrible defensively in their young careers thus far. The bad news is, they are still really young. Towns is now 22 and Wiggins 23. They will still be terrible on defense next year.
3rd, Wiggins and Butler are kind of the same player. They both need the ball in their hands ALOT. I've seen the argument that Butler played off the ball often when Derrick Rose was on the Bulls, but since he's become the All-Star player he is now, he's been EXTREMELY ball dominant, and given that he's the star of the team, I don't see him suddenly needing the ball less. Then there's also Rubio, who also needs the ball, and who is actually USELESS off the ball. These pieces don't fit.
When you get a player like Butler, you surround him with shooting. Look at what LeBron has done with his roster. He's a guy who can get into the paint and find open guys, just like Butler. But instead, Butler has Wiggins and Rubio spotting up . . . those guys' defenders aren't staying home, they are double or triple teaming Butler in the paint.
So, they suck at defense, they can't shoot, and their 3 primary ball handlers kind of all do the same thing and all need the ball constantly (and they all can't shoot). How is this a playoff team again?
I think it's pretty hard to make the case that they are better than the top 7 in the West (as they are constituted prior to FA):
1. Golden State
2. San Antonio
3. Houston
4. Clippers
5. Utah
6. OKC
7. Memphis
I think they are in that next group of 4-5 teams hunting the 8th playoff spot: Portland, Denver, New Orleans, and Minnesota (maybe Dallas/Sacramento get into that conversation)
The Wolves are really talented, and could possibly get into the playoffs based on that alone, but I could easily see Portland, whose roster makes way more sense in the modern NBA, beating them out for the 8th playoff spot.
Last edited by kAzE; 06-26-2017 at 11:41 AM.
Word is coming out of Minnesota that they are intent on dealing Rubio in the offseason.
Now, before you go assuming the TWolves want Tyus to be their PG, it is worth noting that the Wolves are dead set on getting a veteran PG to be their starter. It seems their intent is to get a shoot-first PG to play with Wiggins and Butler because those two guys don't really need a passer to create offense for them. You know who could be a decent fit is Austin Rivers. He knocked down 37% of his 3s last year. George Hill from Utah could also work if Utah decides to rebuild if Hayward leaves to Boston (or elsewhere). I doubt you could get Houston's Patrick Beverley or SA's Patty Mills but those guys would be ideal fits as well.Sources told ESPN that the Wolves, despite Rubio's strong second half last season, are trying to add more shooting to their lineup and continue to make the Spaniard available via trade.
-Jason "no matter what happens, the trade of Dunn almost certainly means that Tyus plays 16+ minutes per game next season" Evans
Why are you wasting time here when you could be wasting it by listening to the latest episode of the DBR Podcast?
If it makes you feel any better, I think the Wolves would make the playoffs even with Rubio. But if they replace Rubio with a "3 and D" PG, they are even more likely to make it.
Butler: I admit I'm a big fan of his, but statistically speaking I think he's top-10. Win shares (3rd), win shares per 48 min (6th), Box plus/minus (10th), real plus/minus (7th) all suggest he belongs in that category. But, even if he were, say, 12-15, that doesn't really discredit the idea that he substantially changes the equation for Minnesota.
Shooting argument: You mention that the key is putting shooters around Butler. Well, the Bulls this year... didn't. And never really have, actually. Mirotic is not a great 3pt shooter (34.2% this year, 35.0% for his career), and actually shot worse than Wiggins did this year (35.6%). As a stretch-4 and pick-and-roll/pop partner, Towns (36.7%) is WAY more valuable than Mirotic. McDermott (37.6%) is, but could never establish himself as a regular due to atrocious defense. Wiggins is a better shooter and player than Wade at this point. Rubio and Rondo are somewhat of a wash. Worth noting that the Bulls (with Butler's 36.7%) was one of the worst shooting teams in the NBA (34.0%) last year. That didn't seem to slow Butler down.
Rubio: the same argument you make against Rubio working alongside Butler could be made for Rajon Rondo, only Rubio is a better defender than Rondo is these days. And as I said, Rubio (like Rondo) would allow Butler to take some possessions off on offense, while also creating easy bucket opportunities for Butler when he is off the ball.
Wiggins: the same argument you make against Wiggins could be made for Dwyane Wade, only at least Wiggins is a better shooter and has athletic potential on defense. I'd argue that Wiggins and the Wolves would do BETTER by having the ball less. Butler (whose offensive efficiency is among the best in basketball despite being a high-volume player) is a HUGE upgrade over Wiggins as primary playmaker.
Competition: You have listed the Clippers and Utah above Minnesota. Frankly, I'm not convinced either of those two teams are playoff-bound next year. The Jazz stand a REALLY good chance of losing Hayward, while Griffin and Paul are both opting out of their contracts this summer.
Your arguments do hold water that they won't likely be an elite team next year. I completely agree that they won't be able to compete with Golden State or (as constituted) Cleveland or San Antonio. But they don't have to be elite to make the playoffs. Frankly, I don't see a reasonable argument why a team with two of the top 20 players in the NBA (Towns and Butler) would miss the playoffs. I think they are instantly well ahead of the Portland/Dallas/Denver/New Orleans (who I think will make a move up next year), and probably ahead of Memphis (their stars are all now aging), Utah (definitely if they lose Hayward, likely even if they don't), and LA (if Paul leaves).
I think you'd be surprised:
http://www.cbssports.com/nba/news/nb...rick-beverley/
The Warriors in the Joe Lacob era have done this a lot, and it hasn't always worked out. In 2011, they bought the 39th pick for $2M and used it to draft Jeremy Tyler. In 2013, they bought Nemanja Nedovic (30th pick) on draft night from the Suns. Of course, they famously (well, famous among Bay Area basketball fans) bought the 38th pick last year for $2.4M to pick up Patrick McCaw, which was, and will continue to prove to be, a tremendous success. Bell also was the 38th pick.
So, it doesn't always work, but given the current, high profile nature of the Warriors, if Jordan Bell is a success (making two successes in a row with this strategy), you can bet more teams will try to buy picks (and more teams will hesitate to get rid of them) going forward. And teams will hesitate to sell picks to the Warriors. I would imagine the source of the $3.5M maximum cash payment for draft picks is the CBA, and if more teams want to employ the strategy, I bet that figure will go up in the next CBA negotiations.
The move makes a lot of sense for the Warriors this year, where the team has only five players under contract at the moment. They need to find some low cost bodies, and paying $3.5M (that I don't think counts against the cap) for a player who will make the league minimum for a year and then a little more than the league minimum in year 2 is kind of a no-brainer.
"I don't like them when they are eating my azaleas or rhododendrons or pansies." - Coach K
I'm very aware that the Bulls were a terrible shooting team. Actually, that was my very first point:
My point was that those 2 teams are really similar. Non-shooting point guard, and non-shooting wings. The only difference is that the Bulls were the #6 defensive team, and Minnesota was #26. IMO, Butler does not transform Minnesota into the #6 defensive team. Those other guys are just too young.
That Bulls team would not have made the playoffs in the West. They were the 8th seed in the East. Now, Butler is on a Western team with more or less the same configuration if they don't find a suitor for Rubio. The Bulls had less talent, but the Wolves are much younger, so I think it's a wash.
Yes, your point about the Clippers and Jazz is valid, but that's why I put that caveat in there (before FA). The Clips are a total mystery right now, but IMO, the Jazz can still easily be better than the Timberwolves even minus Hayward. The George Hill situation will be a factor, but Gobert is the best center in the league, and Hood will only get better with Hayward out of the picture.
Last edited by kAzE; 06-26-2017 at 04:32 PM.
There is one otber glaring difference: the Wolves have Towns. The Bulls have nothing remotely comparable to him. I would argue that the Bulls' supporting cast this year was comparable to the Wolves... except for Towns. Put Towns on last year's Bulls team and they win 50+ games. Now put Butler with Thibs and a year-older Towns and Wiggins, and I think that is a 45-win team. Even in the West.
And sorry, but there is absolutely no way the Jazz without Hayward are better than the Wolves with Butler. Hood, Hill, and Gobert are nice complementary players. But not difference makers as first options.
I'm stupefied.
Houston wants to get rid of Patrick Beverley...
Wow...
There must be something I am missing. Beverley is the ultimate 3-and-D player. He was 1st Team All-NBA Defensive Team this year... HE IS ONE OF THE 5 BEST DEFENDERS IN BASKETBALL!! He hits 3s at a very nice 37.5% rate over his career. He's 28 so he is in the middle of his prime. Of course, in today's NBA is seems everything is about cap space and contracts. Goodness knows there are a lot of wretched contracts around the league. So, what does his contract look like?
Beverly is due to make $5.5 mil in 2017-18. After that, there is a team option year at $5.0 million (yes, his contract actually goes down in the team option year?!?!?!). To call that a bargain is a massive understatement. I think there are folks who compute the value of players in the NBA and I bet Beverley is worth over $10 mil a season.
But Houston wants to deal him so they can clear another $5 mil in contract space. To be clear, this extra $5 mil won't get them to the max, where they could make a run at Gordon Hayward or Chris Paul or Blake Griffin or Paul Milsaps... it would probably just allow them to overspend on some other good, but not great free agent.
If I were the Minnesota GM, I would run to Houston to make a deal for Beverley. Add him to the TWolves and I think they instantly become a contender for a top 4 seed in the West.
-Jason "I just do not understand the NBA sometimes" Evans
Why are you wasting time here when you could be wasting it by listening to the latest episode of the DBR Podcast?