Official 2024 Offseason Moves

[whatisacenter]

Kind of wild watching these playoffs and seeing guys we refused to trade for at one point or another making big impacts all over the place.

I still can't believe we didn't trade JK for OG. Our defense would've been on par with the Wolves. Curry/Moody/Wiggins/OG/Dray :drool:

lol, no rim protection to speak of.

[Onus]

Kind of wild watching these playoffs and seeing guys we refused to trade for at one point or another making big impacts all over the place.

I still can't believe we didn't trade JK for OG. Our defense would've been on par with the Wolves. Curry/Moody/Wiggins/OG/Dray :drool:

lol, no rim protection to speak of.

Dray is pretty good at it. Just does it differently than other bigs.

There's a lot of length and athleticism that can cover a lot of ground. Would've been hard to dribble and pass around that lineup.

[whatisacenter]

I still can't believe we didn't trade JK for OG. Our defense would've been on par with the Wolves. Curry/Moody/Wiggins/OG/Dray :drool:

lol, no rim protection to speak of.

Dray is pretty good at it. Just does it differently than other bigs.

There's a lot of length and athleticism that can cover a lot of ground. Would've been hard to dribble and pass around that lineup.

I don’t think Dray is that guy anymore. That kings game was ugly for him.

[svart]

i feel there are only two realistic path from here. three if you count teaming up with bron and kd.

1. bring bron and kd, sign klay to a decent amount and trade the youngsters. old men versus the new generation, i don't think this will happen, and even if it will, that team does not win a chip, too old, too late.
2. if cury wants to win, we should trade him to another team, here he can't do it. trade then the old guard for picks and whatever. go full rebuild
3. if curry wants to ride into the sunset with his buddies, sign klay and wait two more years by being mediocre. trade whatever assets we have and keep jk, podz and tjd. and moody if his arse can take two more years of riding pine.

my opinion is they will take the last one. so i expect two more years of mediocrity.

I don't think and really hope the first two options don't happen.

With option 3, which I also think is the most likely, why would they be trading assets? If they do the ride into the sunset thing there is no reason to mortgage the future. Here are some snippets from an article on their cap issues.

https://www.spotrac.com/news/_/id/2234/2024-nba-offseason-financial-previews

Thompson is a role player now. He’s not an All-Star and he never will be again. If the Warriors are serious about cutting salary, it starts with Thompson just as much as it does with Paul.

Golden State needs to be firm here. Thompson made $43.2 million last year. Ideally, the Warriors would cut that figure in half. Something in the range of $20-$22 million feels fair. You’re acknowledging and paying for everything Thompson has meant to the franchise, while also acknowledging he’s a lessened, but still valuable player…at the right price.

Last thing on Thompson: To some extent how much the Warriors pay him is only dependent on how serious they are about getting out of the tax this coming season. The far more important matter is the number of years that Golden State locks into for Thompson. This needs to be year-to-year territory now, and if it’s a two-year deal, the second season has to be something the team has control over.

Waiving Paul, and cutting Thompson’s salary roughly in half would have the Warriors about $5.3 million under the luxury tax line with 11 players under contract. That’s pretty workable, and in range of ducking the tax entirely after the roster is filled out.

There’s been reporting that Gary Payton II may opt out of his $9.1 million contract for next season. The idea is Payton will opt out to sign a long-term deal that lowers his number for this season. That’s a way for Golden State to create about $4-$5 million more in wiggle room under the tax.

Lowering the tax, or dodging it entirely, is important for the Warriors to save some money for what has become a merely above-average team. It’s also important to start resetting the clock on the tax repeater rules.

Mike Dunleavy Jr’s first offseason running the front office was mostly about setting the stage for the latter path, while keeping the path to contention open. Now, it’s time to reset both the roster and the cap sheet. That might mean a short-term falloff, but one that leads to a long-term gain.

The bolded part is why I am frustrated with ownership and the FO for the last offseason. The team could already be where they are hoping to get to in a year.

By assets i meant wiggs, loon, gp2, if they have any value. Wiggs has for sure, not sure about the others. Why keep them, really, in this scenario.

[vvoland]

lol, no rim protection to speak of.

Dray is pretty good at it. Just does it differently than other bigs.

There's a lot of length and athleticism that can cover a lot of ground. Would've been hard to dribble and pass around that lineup.

I don’t think Dray is that guy anymore. That kings game was ugly for him.

I think Dray had a fantastic season, when he wasn't suspended and/or ejected, that is. Defensively, he was at, or near, the level he's played at for a decade and was better than he was in a long time on offense. He had one of the best defensive plays I've seen in a while when he stunted at Kyrie and recovered to block gafford, late in the year, to seal a win. Playing the 5 for loooong stretches of the season took it's toll but he was still a monster on defense. In 40+ games post suspension, he only got tossed once and seemed to be in pretty good control of his emotions while still playing with his crazy intensity.

Really hope he gets healthy going into next season and can channel the therapeutized dray for all 82 games.

[EvanZ]

What's interesting about this team is that even with Draymond missing a bunch of games we finished with the 11th best Net Rating in the NBA. That was good enough for 7th in the West. It really wouldn't take much for us to pass the Clippers and Suns who were ahead of us.

So it wouldn't surprise me if --- being as objective as possible --- the FO is looking at this team through that lens and not the lens that we finished 10th in terms of record. Not saying that justifies "running it back"...but it does give a narrative that I kind of expect to hear at some point.

[vvoland]

i feel there are only two realistic path from here. three if you count teaming up with bron and kd.

1. bring bron and kd, sign klay to a decent amount and trade the youngsters. old men versus the new generation, i don't think this will happen, and even if it will, that team does not win a chip, too old, too late.
2. if cury wants to win, we should trade him to another team, here he can't do it. trade then the old guard for picks and whatever. go full rebuild
3. if curry wants to ride into the sunset with his buddies, sign klay and wait two more years by being mediocre. trade whatever assets we have and keep jk, podz and tjd. and moody if his arse can take two more years of riding pine.

my opinion is they will take the last one. so i expect two more years of mediocrity.

I don't think and really hope the first two options don't happen.

With option 3, which I also think is the most likely, why would they be trading assets? If they do the ride into the sunset thing there is no reason to mortgage the future. Here are some snippets from an article on their cap issues.

https://www.spotrac.com/news/_/id/2234/2024-nba-offseason-financial-previews

Thompson is a role player now. He’s not an All-Star and he never will be again. If the Warriors are serious about cutting salary, it starts with Thompson just as much as it does with Paul.

Golden State needs to be firm here. Thompson made $43.2 million last year. Ideally, the Warriors would cut that figure in half. Something in the range of $20-$22 million feels fair. You’re acknowledging and paying for everything Thompson has meant to the franchise, while also acknowledging he’s a lessened, but still valuable player…at the right price.

Last thing on Thompson: To some extent how much the Warriors pay him is only dependent on how serious they are about getting out of the tax this coming season. The far more important matter is the number of years that Golden State locks into for Thompson. This needs to be year-to-year territory now, and if it’s a two-year deal, the second season has to be something the team has control over.

Waiving Paul, and cutting Thompson’s salary roughly in half would have the Warriors about $5.3 million under the luxury tax line with 11 players under contract. That’s pretty workable, and in range of ducking the tax entirely after the roster is filled out.

There’s been reporting that Gary Payton II may opt out of his $9.1 million contract for next season. The idea is Payton will opt out to sign a long-term deal that lowers his number for this season. That’s a way for Golden State to create about $4-$5 million more in wiggle room under the tax.

Lowering the tax, or dodging it entirely, is important for the Warriors to save some money for what has become a merely above-average team. It’s also important to start resetting the clock on the tax repeater rules.

Mike Dunleavy Jr’s first offseason running the front office was mostly about setting the stage for the latter path, while keeping the path to contention open. Now, it’s time to reset both the roster and the cap sheet. That might mean a short-term falloff, but one that leads to a long-term gain.

The bolded part is why I am frustrated with ownership and the FO for the last offseason. The team could already be where they are hoping to get to in a year.

By assets i meant wiggs, loon, gp2, if they have any value. Wiggs has for sure, not sure about the others. Why keep them, really, in this scenario.

I don't think that's true. The contract length and his play the last two years are not a good combo. From everything I've heard and read, he's a negative contract that we'll need to attach an asset to move him. It's why the dubs didn't do so at the deadline and he didn't exactly shine post-deadline.

As much as I want to move wiggins, mostly to open up room for JK and MM to play more at the 3, I don't want to attach an asset to move him and I don't think we can get anything back for wigs that will approach what he can provide if he plays like he used to. Not peak two-way wigs but, at least, an engaged, one-way wigs. Other than attaching an asset, our other hope would be to take back another toxic asset (e.g. ben simmons, ayton, etc.). I'd bet on wiggs reverting to the mean more than I would on simmons or ayton rediscovering a desire to play basketball. Neither are particularly good bets but I'd try to get Wigs in the right place mentally and hope he gets to a much better place by next year's deadline.

[whatisacenter]

What's interesting about this team is that even with Draymond missing a bunch of games we finished with the 11th best Net Rating in the NBA. That was good enough for 7th in the West. It really wouldn't take much for us to pass the Clippers and Suns who were ahead of us.

So it wouldn't surprise me if --- being as objective as possible --- the FO is looking at this team through that lens and not the lens that we finished 10th in terms of record. Not saying that justifies "running it back"...but it does give a narrative that I kind of expect to hear at some point.

I agree that will be the narrative if they "run it back" but the data doesn't really tell the whole story. The Warriors only won a handful of games against the top 6 teams in the West and got destroyed at nearly full health(only missing GP2) by a Kings' team that was missing a couple of rotation guys.

The mini winning streak they went on after Draymond's return was primarily done against some of the weaker teams in the league or teams that were missing guys.

I'm kind of resigned to the fact that they will go the 'ride into the sunset' route with Steph, Klay and Draymond and I just hope they don't compound that mistake by trading the future for an old "star".

[Onus]

What's interesting about this team is that even with Draymond missing a bunch of games we finished with the 11th best Net Rating in the NBA. That was good enough for 7th in the West. It really wouldn't take much for us to pass the Clippers and Suns who were ahead of us.

So it wouldn't surprise me if --- being as objective as possible --- the FO is looking at this team through that lens and not the lens that we finished 10th in terms of record. Not saying that justifies "running it back"...but it does give a narrative that I kind of expect to hear at some point.

I agree that will be the narrative if they "run it back" but the data doesn't really tell the whole story. The Warriors only won a handful of games against the top 6 teams in the West and got destroyed at nearly full health(only missing GP2) by a Kings' team that was missing a couple of rotation guys.

The mini winning streak they went on after Draymond's return was primarily done against some of the weaker teams in the league or teams that were missing guys.

I'm kind of resigned to the fact that they will go the 'ride into the sunset' route with Steph, Klay and Draymond and I just hope they don't compound that mistake by trading the future for an old "star".

I just hope they don't run it back with Klay. I also hope they don't trade for an old star. Anyone we trade for better be under 30.

[azwfan]

What's interesting about this team is that even with Draymond missing a bunch of games we finished with the 11th best Net Rating in the NBA. That was good enough for 7th in the West. It really wouldn't take much for us to pass the Clippers and Suns who were ahead of us.

So it wouldn't surprise me if --- being as objective as possible --- the FO is looking at this team through that lens and not the lens that we finished 10th in terms of record. Not saying that justifies "running it back"...but it does give a narrative that I kind of expect to hear at some point.

The mini winning streak they went on after Draymond's return was primarily done against some of the weaker teams in the league or teams that were missing guys.

I'm kind of resigned to the fact that they will go the 'ride into the sunset' route with Steph, Klay and Draymond and I just hope they don't compound that mistake by trading the future for an old "star".

Record was much improved after Draymond came back. It was also after their assistant coach passed away in front of them. I'm willing to bet their coach / coworker / friend / brother dying in front of them at dinner had a large impact on the team coming together. They had Draymond earlier in the year and sucked.

I'm not convinced that any of their young players are part of a future championship core. I am convinced that Draymond and Klay aren't either. If we're being honest, they weren't a core part of the last title - certainly not Klay. Klay was terrible and Draymond was getting benched in the Finals.

Curry is the core. If we want to win with Curry, he needs help. Real help, not just big egos living in the past. He needs a #1a or at the very least a 1b. Unfortunately, those don't grow on trees.

[TB]

Kind of wild watching these playoffs and seeing guys we refused to trade for at one point or another making big impacts all over the place.

I still can't believe we didn't trade JK for OG. Our defense would've been on par with the Wolves. Curry/Moody/Wiggins/OG/Dray :drool:

Do we know what the JK trade that would have been accepted even was?

My impression was 2 trade deadlines ago (or was it the offseason... I can't remember) there was the rumor of "well they wanted Kuminga also" but nobody said what that entire trade would have been since the money didn't add up and what picks were never mentioned.

As for this year, I think Toronto wanted Quickley. Not to say we couldn't have offered a ton of picks to maybe change their mind, but it sure seemed like they wanted that specific player to pair with Barnes.

[whatisacenter]

Kind of wild watching these playoffs and seeing guys we refused to trade for at one point or another making big impacts all over the place.

I still can't believe we didn't trade JK for OG. Our defense would've been on par with the Wolves. Curry/Moody/Wiggins/OG/Dray :drool:

Do we know what the JK trade that would have been accepted even was?

My impression was 2 trade deadlines ago (or was it the offseason... I can't remember) there was the rumor of "well they wanted Kuminga also" but nobody said what that entire trade would have been since the money didn't add up and what picks were never mentioned.

As for this year, I think Toronto wanted Quickley. Not to say we couldn't have offered a ton of picks to maybe change their mind, but it sure seemed like they wanted that specific player to pair with Barnes.

One of my pet peeves are rumored trades being construed as factual deals that a team passed on.

Front offices and agents float that stuff to gauge and influence the market all the time.

[CDM_Stats]

Wolves 2 years ago, no Gobert: 13th defensively
Wolves last year, w/Gobert: 10th defensively
Wolves this year: 1st defensively

There were many facets to this improvement, but I've been saying for a long time - Gobert is not the catalyst. This isn't 15 years ago when a defensive anchor does that kind of thing. What they did is revamp their *perimeter* defense, as well as continue to improve there. Going from DLo/Rivers/Nowell/Prince to Conley/NAW/Monte is a massive perimeter upgrade. In addition to continued improvement from Edwards and McDaniels

15+ years ago, good interior defense helped bad perimeter defenders look good. Now we're starting to see the opposite, where good perimeter defense and the ability to switch is what makes defenses elite. I wonder where they got that idea!

Since most Cs, especially in the playoffs, aren't going to make you pay offensively (and the ones that do can be doubled like they've been doing to Jokic).. having one that's fairly anchored to the key is only really necessary if you have a lot of poor perimeter defenders to account for. And they don't anymore. So despite the media going nuts over the Gobert trade, I'd posit that the Wolves would be in a better spot, right now, if they never made it, and instead had Kessler, Vanderbilt, their 23 1st (Keyontae George - or maybe if they drafted well, they could have had Jaquez Jr or Podz), their 25 1st, their 26 1st (swap but it wont be swapped), their 27 1st, and their 29 1st

Saw someone make comp of Rudy as Bogut for this Wolves team. Murderous perimeter D backed by a defensive anchor, but their best defensive lineups might still be going smaller.

Yup. At the very least, Gobert isnt the lineup lock that guys like Edwards, KAT and Conley are.. they are virtual locks to be in the 'best' lineup in any circumstance. How they played without Gobert against DEN really lined up with what the metrics are saying. Its all small sample sizes so its hard to say for sure, plus there's no chance the Wolves move off of Gobert considering what they paid to get him. But in looking back at the trade, I just wonder.. if Kessler gives you like 75-80% of what Gobert does (and IMO he can and maybe more), then were Vando and a slew of 1sts worth the upgrade?

[Onus]

I still can't believe we didn't trade JK for OG. Our defense would've been on par with the Wolves. Curry/Moody/Wiggins/OG/Dray :drool:

Do we know what the JK trade that would have been accepted even was?

My impression was 2 trade deadlines ago (or was it the offseason... I can't remember) there was the rumor of "well they wanted Kuminga also" but nobody said what that entire trade would have been since the money didn't add up and what picks were never mentioned.

As for this year, I think Toronto wanted Quickley. Not to say we couldn't have offered a ton of picks to maybe change their mind, but it sure seemed like they wanted that specific player to pair with Barnes.

One of my pet peeves are rumored trades being construed as factual deals that a team passed on.

Front offices and agents float that stuff to gauge and influence the market all the time.

Right so 2 teams or agents floated out that jk’s value is that of a really high impact role player. We don’t need to know the full details just that they were the foundations of a trade discussion. We declined because we value him higher than that.

I think it’s hilarious that when the og trade was originally discussed everyone here was like but you don’t know the details of the trade they could’ve asked for 3 1sts on top of jk. Now that it’s being discussed y’all want to say jk has more value than og by himself. Like damn y’all all over the place.

[EvanZ]

Last night I was reminded how much we dropped the ball by not trying to sign Hartenstein. I don't know, maybe we did try. Not hard enough though. That dude would have unlocked so much for us. It's sort of the story of the last few years. Just too much resting on our laurels, like literally the textbook definition.

[whatisacenter]

Last night I was reminded how much we dropped the ball by not trying to sign Hartenstein. I don't know, maybe we did try. Not hard enough though. That dude would have unlocked so much for us. It's sort of the story of the last few years. Just too much resting on our laurels, like literally the textbook definition.

It's the Draymond effect. The FO wasn't going to sign/trade for 7' players that wouldn't get on the court.

[EvanZ]

Last night I was reminded how much we dropped the ball by not trying to sign Hartenstein. I don't know, maybe we did try. Not hard enough though. That dude would have unlocked so much for us. It's sort of the story of the last few years. Just too much resting on our laurels, like literally the textbook definition.

It's the Draymond effect. The FO wasn't going to sign/trade for 7' players that wouldn't get on the court.

When we had good 7-footers like Bogut and Zaza they got on the court. We all know how much Kerr loved having size back then. And then they went and drafted Wiseman, so that doesn't really sound like they were avoiding 7-footers. Imagine if they just signed Hartenstein and didn't feel the need to take Wiseman (not sure if this was the timing but you get the point).

[EvanZ]

Actually the timing is even worse. It's likely imo that they didn't go after Hartenstein because they didn't want him "blocking" Wiseman. Big time Jean Luc-Picard face palm gif.

[TB]

Actually the timing is even worse. It's likely imo that they didn't go after Hartenstein because they didn't want him "blocking" Wiseman. Big time Jean Luc-Picard face palm gif.

Hartenstein and Goga have been the two depth centers I've wanted since 2020 when they were available. Missed Hartenstein in two different offseason... then not getting Goga when JMG was our only backup center was beyond idiotic.

The other one was Garuba, but MDJ went and got him.

[TB]

My prediction for what the Dubs do:

- Trade Wiggins to Dallas for THJ, Kleber, and hopefully O-Max
- Let CP3 walk
- Sign Klay to somewhere in the 2/40 range
- Use MLE on Monte Morris
- depending on where those numbers come in, they will restructure GP2 to save a couple million, and then if still needed waive Looney, but will try not to do that

Steph / Morris / Quinones
Podz / THJ / GP2
Kuminga / Klay / OMax
Dray / Moody / Santos
Trayce / Kleber / Looney

One more run with the core while getting out of the tax.