What level of success would make the Gobert trade acceptable?

[Magoose]

First, how do you value mid-late 1st-round picks? Second, how big of a fan were you of the players we traded? This is a total mixed bag and not worth arguing IMO because everyone has a different view.

Their value is based on who is picking and what year it is.

If it was us in the past, nearly every pick outside of #1 was a wasted pick (or didn't lead to sustained winning).

I don't believe that poor execution or decision making in the past has any kind of impact on future decisions.

Thus the correct question should be: Why didn't we address the lack of scouting and decision making in the FO instead of just giving away the most precious assets we have in the first place?

[urinesane]

To the three amigos above (before TimberKat's post), if I am a "troll" and "mean" as well as "hard headed", why is my And1 to post ratio so much higher than all of yours?

younggunsmn:
Posting since 2007
Posts: 4,563
And1: 783
17% And1 to post %

Folklore:
Posting since 2017
Posts: 530
And1: 144
27% And1 to post %

Note30
Posting since 2014
Posts: 4,935
And1: 1,310
26.5% And1 to post %

urinesane (admittedly a terrible name that I just haven't taken the effort to change)
Posting since 2010
Posts: 4,742
And1: 2,648
55% And1 to post %

Now, don't get me wrong, this doesn't necessarily I'm better or always have correct views. It does however mean that more people that read my posts take the time to appreciate it by clicking a button. Which since we don't really have poster stats or advanced metrics to point to, leads me to believe that I bring more value to this board than the three of you (at least in the eyes of other posters here, I am banned from General Board btw). The fact that I have more liked posts than all three of you combined probably says more about you than it does about me though.

There's a reason 2/3 (and now at the request of younggunsmn's lawyer 3/3) were already on my ignore list. You don't make good points or help create an environment for open discussion. You just look for others to wallow in your misery and confirm your own perceptions/bias and get mad when they don't share in your negativity (or if someone dares to poke fun at your dramatic takes).

Just because I don't agree with your perceptions and give you a bit of sass from time to time does not make me a troll, it just makes me someone who doesn't agree with you.

I enjoy quite a few posters around here, that's why I still visit. Sure having an And1 % of 55% on 4,742 post may not mean much, but it does at least let me know that my posts aren't just falling into the void and add some sort of value to some of the people who are taking the time to read them (I swear I don't And1 my own posts).

I post for the discussions I get to have with those people, not with you.

By the way, many of whom do not agree with my takes, but respect the fact that I try to take the time to think out my posts and put things into context. Many of them disagree and I often appreciate those who disagree and are able to make logical points without getting super emotional about how upset they are by a basketball team's decisions (many times I have changed my thoughts on a subject due to a well thought out post that was counter to my view at the time).

There are PLENTY of posters here that I think should just do something else with their lives. Being a fan of this team clearly makes them choose to feel miserable (it is a choice) and sure, maybe their life outside of this forum is all sunshine and rainbows, but I somehow doubt they take time out of amazing and enjoyable lives to come here and make themselves feel bad.

Honestly, at times over the last 3-4 years these types of posters have made this forum borderline unreadable at times and it seemed like it was just the same 5 posters being upset and writing their diary on a public forum.

At the end of the day, we are all here because we WANT TO ENJOY following this team (outside of those that stop by to troll from other teams/eras). I personally try to lower the bar for my enjoyment requirements, because I simply don't have nearly as much time on my hands as when I first started posting here 13 years ago (holy crap, 13 years!?!) and I would rather be happy than feel like I'm right all the time.

Many of you constantly raise the bar to the point where no matter what this team does will never give you any joy. For nine posters here anything short of Championship appearances in the next 3 seasons will not make you happy (lol what a ridiculous thing to expect out of this franchise).

I would say that if you don't enjoy this franchise and being a fan of it you should consider the following:
1.) Find a new team.
2.) Get a new hobby to replace this.
3.) Stop taking yourself so seriously.

Nobody is here to read your depressing thoughts. If you're going to be delusional, at least let it be positive (like mine!) or start a blog that nobody reads.

To those that get it, thank you for being here and making this place still worth reading.

For those that are in a constant state of butthurt over a group of millionaires trying to put a ball through a ring, maybe try pickle-ball? I hear that's really popular now.

[urinesane]

I have no idea why I'm even reading this. The old Simpson gif of grandpa walking in and out of the room would fit this.

Rudy is a bad fit period. He gets in the way of our top player.

Our top player has said that nobody is scared of Rudy. Any has even co-signed other people complaining about the trade. Rudy's personal numbers don't matter to his fit with the team. His trade here has made further future movies limited.

You have some good points about respect other's opinion, be open minded, don't be like a cultists. Doesn't it saying "Rudy is a bad fit period" fall into the same fallacies? Is "Our top payer has said that noboday is scared of Rudy" a little out of context for proof of Gobert's ability or fit? Isn't that a believe and not a fact?

If you are the team's best player, aren't you supposed to make everyone around you better? I just watched the PHX vs DEN game, I see KD and Booker pass out of double teams. I don't see Ayton in their way. I see Murry make cuts and pass to Jokic. Why can't I expect Ant , our best player, to be able to do some of those things? If he can't then should we really build a team around him?

I really should ask Gobert to pay me for making these posts

Great post TK.

It's really strange how people confuse "facts" with "perceptions".

A quick breakdown for those that need it, I'll use an example.

Fact: Rudy Gobert is a player for the Minnesota Timberwolves.
Perception: Rudy Gobert is a bad fit for the Minnesota Timberwolves.

Fact: Rudy Gobert is a 3x DPOY in the NBA.
Perception: People are not afraid of him and that is bad.

Facts are what happened. Perceptions are how you feel about them.

[urinesane]

Posting here isn't especially helpful or productive to anyone's personal life but we do it because of our shared love for the sport and the teams we follow.
That means being happy when they win and sad when they lose.
It means being glad when they do smart things and angry when they do dumb things.
And the whole point of this site ("realGM") is armchair quarterbacking what your team does.

You get to define what being a fan is now? I control when I feel happy and when I feel sad, it's not up to someone else. Enjoy being puppet on a string, when they say nice things you're up, and when they say not nice things you're down. I'm not interested in tying my feelings to things out of my control, but you do you.

Urine sane, please put me on ignore and cease and desist from replying to ANY of my posts.
When you first started posting here I gave you the benefit of the doubt even though you were a kfan board troll with a stupid username. I'm a big boy but I don't think the mods should tolerate the kind of crap I have underlined in your post.
It's called concern trolling.

Wow, I've definitely rustled some jimmies around here in my time, but I've never gotten a cease and desist. I am not a troll, a troll is someone that makes counter points not because they believe in them, but to cause an emotional reaction (usually making someone angry/upset), just because you think you're correct doesn't mean that someone that doesn't buy into your melodrama is a troll.

Also, you know how the ignore (foe) button works, you've been here long enough. Feel free to use it, but I'll ignore who I choose to, thank you (which you will be one of, but not because you are trying to call the mods because someone didn't agree with you).

So by your own admission you posted a poll to bait out opinions you don't like so you could attack them?
That is pretty textbook trolling. Mods, is this the kind of discourse we strive for here?

Is that how you warped it? I was seeing the symptoms all around here and wanted to see what the actual root cause was. It wasn't that people were just unhappy about this, they were generally the people around here that are always unhappy about everything (and at this point it's clear that it's because they want to be unhappy, whether conscious of it or not).

I will be beyond happy if we make it to the WCF next year,
But our floor for expectations for this team pre-trade was minimum one or 2 2nd round appearances in the next 4 years.

If they didn't make the trade and KAT misses 52 games, they do not make the playoffs this season, period. So lower that hypothetical floor in your mind at least a few feet.

If we go further, it will also be in spite of Gobert's many shortcomings and drag on the offense.
We went from a top 10 offense to bottom 10, and it didn't get any better with a healthy KAT,
even with career shooting years from D-Lo and Conley.

Well done! Now you've not only blamed all of our issues this season on Gobert AND pre-blamed him for future misery/disappointment, but now you've also taken away any potential future credit to him in case they DO in fact succeed!

That's some Player Haters' Ball level stuff right there man.

This trade this big will always be a game of WHAT IF.
Every draft that goes by will add to that as hypotheticals become realities.
What would 25 year old Ant look like with 25 year old Kessler and 26 year old Jaden?
No matter how far we go, how much of that is really because of Gobert and how much because of the growth and improvement of other players?
I don't like these questions and uncertainties.

WHAT IF on May 28th, 2007 you had decided to not make an account here and to post 4,563 times over a 16 year period? Would you be happier or less happy? Who knows?

Why do you have to be certain about things? There's no certainty in life and definitely none in sports, so I suggest you learn to live with the uncertainty of it all.

We've spent 2 decades now with basically nothing but hope for the future to cling to,
and trading away so many future draft picks brings with it a tremendous amount of unease.

Setting expectations for the present feels like walking on shifting sands.

Why do you feel the need to set expectations in the first place? They are simply guesses of what the future will be and a factor to judge the results against (often bad). I'd rather expect nothing (because after following this team for 20+ years that is the healthiest choice) and try to appreciate whatever happens (even if it's not my preference).

We could have been born in the 1900's and had to fight in trenches in WWI, instead we were born in a time where you can instantly argue with anyone around the world about who's better at putting a ball through a hoop. What a time to be alive!

[Magoose]

First, how do you value mid-late 1st-round picks? Second, how big of a fan were you of the players we traded? This is a total mixed bag and not worth arguing IMO because everyone has a different view.

Their value is based on who is picking and what year it is.

If it was us in the past, nearly every pick outside of #1 was a wasted pick (or didn't lead to sustained winning).

Well, poor decisions in the past won't neccessarily have an impact on future decisions. Also, it looks like we were on the right track with drafting before we pried TC away from Denver. Our core currently consists of players that all have been drafted by us. So draft picks might be quite valuable to this organization as of late, don't you think?
But, instead of trying to improve the scouting and decision making in the FO, the organization decided to just send the picks to Salt Lake.
I mean it still could pay off in the end somehow, but man, it is such a huge gamble.

[urinesane]

First, how do you value mid-late 1st-round picks? Second, how big of a fan were you of the players we traded? This is a total mixed bag and not worth arguing IMO because everyone has a different view.

Their value is based on who is picking and what year it is.

If it was us in the past, nearly every pick outside of #1 was a wasted pick (or didn't lead to sustained winning).

Well, poor decisions in the past won't neccessarily have an impact on future decisions. Also, it looks like we were on the right track with drafting before we pried TC away from Denver. Our core currently consists of players that all have been drafted by us. So draft picks might be quite valuable to this organization as of late, don't you think?
But, instead of trying to improve the scouting and decision making in the FO, the organization decided to just send the picks to Salt Lake.
I mean it still could pay off in the end somehow, but man, it is such a huge gamble.

I don't disagree with what you just said, but I think perhaps we should try to look at it a bit differently if possible.

In the past we've coveted lottery picks (especially top ones) as a shiny new box of hope that could come and save our franchise from the cellar of the NBA. We've ended up getting a lot of expensive rookies, who are not franchise cornerstones (often times not even being solid rotational players) on contracts that are a negative value (based on their production for the price).

We have our core guys, KAT, ANT, McDaniels, Gobert are guys that put up enough production to justify big contracts (you can argue this way or that about KAT/Goberts, but their past output has justified their current contracts taking out last season as an outlier).

So we already have expensive contracts, the good thing is we actually have guys that can be the foundations of a winning team (which we have rarely had in the past).

In my opinion, trading away future 1st with this core is a horse of a different color compared to a basement dwelling team doing the same to get a superstar.

Now that we have a FO that has shown it can get value regardless of where their pick falls, I think it's much less risky to trade those picks (one because winning will make them less valuable when they actually end up turning into a #). With later 1st round picks/2nd round picks the FO can take chances on undervalued players, develop them without the pressure that is on top lottery guys to contribute immediately (and for much less money), find rotational guys to fill in the bench on much better deals (that you also have the ability to extend since you drafted them or turn into trade assets if they aren't part of the future).

How many consistently winning teams draft franchise saviors with their outside of the lottery picks? Once you have consistency, and a winning core (with pieces to build around longterm), the goal is to find players that will develop at a good price to the team to replace the guys that end up leaving (older vets, guys on big contracts that no longer contribute as needed) etc.

The draft is not always the same and I think as a franchise they have moved out of the bottom dwelling looking for a winning powerball ticket mentality, and have instead moved to "We have a solid core" let's use good scouting and take a moneyball approach to filling out the rest of the roster, so that while it may be top heavy on the pay, it's not on production/value.

The teams that make tons of money tend to get a really top heavy core (as many stars as they can) and fill it out with guys that are vets looking to win rather than get paid (and the rest of the roster is G League/end of bench filler).

Since we are not a FA destination (generally speaking) it's better to look for undervalued assets in the draft and in trades/FA to help sustain winning longterm and build an actual culture around it (not just success in small flashes).

[Folklore]

I have no idea why I'm even reading this. The old Simpson gif of grandpa walking in and out of the room would fit this.

Rudy is a bad fit period. He gets in the way of our top player.

Our top player has said that nobody is scared of Rudy. Any has even co-signed other people complaining about the trade. Rudy's personal numbers don't matter to his fit with the team. His trade here has made further future movies limited.

You have some good points about respect other's opinion, be open minded, don't be like a cultists. Doesn't it saying "Rudy is a bad fit period" fall into the same fallacies? Is "Our top payer has said that noboday is scared of Rudy" a little out of context for proof of Gobert's ability or fit? Isn't that a believe and not a fact?

If you are the team's best player, aren't you supposed to make everyone around you better? I just watched the PHX vs DEN game, I see KD and Booker pass out of double teams. I don't see Ayton in their way. I see Murry make cuts and pass to Jokic. Why can't I expect Ant , our best player, to be able to do some of those things? If he can't then should we really build a team around him?

I really should ask Gobert to pay me for making these posts

Great post TK.

It's really strange how people confuse "facts" with "perceptions".

A quick breakdown for those that need it, I'll use an example.

Fact: Rudy Gobert is a player for the Minnesota Timberwolves.
Perception: Rudy Gobert is a bad fit for the Minnesota Timberwolves.

Fact: Rudy Gobert is a 3x DPOY in the NBA.
Perception: People are not afraid of him and that is bad.

Facts are what happened. Perceptions are how you feel about them.

Why do you guys come across as Rudys very close friends. TK saying he should get paid for his defending Rudy shows his bias. when people speak about Rudy its not personal I don't think he's a trash player, just a horrible fit for us. If NBA team is better plying at a fast pace, adding a slow center who doesn't spread the floor and other players have to change their game just to make said player minutes worthy is in fact, a bad fit.
If I somehow buy a new hood that's lime green for my wife's black Charger by mistake. Should I tell her to paint the rest of it the same color to make it work? Why is it up to Ant to adjust his game just to accommodate a horrible trade and help ppl save face? Its because he's who he is ta moves should be made to make his life easier. ,Why is that not clear to Kahnnelly? he's supposed to help us, not, fuq us up.

[urinesane]

You have some good points about respect other's opinion, be open minded, don't be like a cultists. Doesn't it saying "Rudy is a bad fit period" fall into the same fallacies? Is "Our top payer has said that noboday is scared of Rudy" a little out of context for proof of Gobert's ability or fit? Isn't that a believe and not a fact?

If you are the team's best player, aren't you supposed to make everyone around you better? I just watched the PHX vs DEN game, I see KD and Booker pass out of double teams. I don't see Ayton in their way. I see Murry make cuts and pass to Jokic. Why can't I expect Ant , our best player, to be able to do some of those things? If he can't then should we really build a team around him?

I really should ask Gobert to pay me for making these posts

Great post TK.

It's really strange how people confuse "facts" with "perceptions".

A quick breakdown for those that need it, I'll use an example.

Fact: Rudy Gobert is a player for the Minnesota Timberwolves.
Perception: Rudy Gobert is a bad fit for the Minnesota Timberwolves.

Fact: Rudy Gobert is a 3x DPOY in the NBA.
Perception: People are not afraid of him and that is bad.

Facts are what happened. Perceptions are how you feel about them.

Why do you guys come across as Rudys very close friends. TK saying he should get paid for his defending Rudy shows his bias. when people speak about Rudy its not personal I don't think he's a trash player, just a horrible fit for us. If NBA team is better plying at a fast pace, adding a slow center who doesn't spread the floor and other players have to change their game just to make said player minutes worthy is in fact, a bad fit.
If I somehow buy a new hood that's lime green for my wife's black Charger by mistake. Should I tell her to paint the rest of it the same color to make it work? Why is it up to Ant to adjust his game just to accommodate a horrible trade and help ppl save face? Its because he's who he is ta moves should be made to make his life easier. ,Why is that not clear to Kahnnelly? he's supposed to help us, not, fuq us up.

So because we don't hate Rudy, we are his closest friends? There's no potential in between?

When you speak about Rudy, it definitely is personal, as in you are letting your personal feelings cloud your perceptions and weigh them heavily to the negative to confirm your already held bias' against him.

Your hood analogy doesn't quite hit, we aren't buying car parts, those are static (also the color of a hood has no impact on it's performance as a hood and is only superficial). NBA players (and humans) are not static, they are constantly changing with time and experience.

Answer this question and we'll better understand your bias/perception based on the answer:

Do you think the Wolves would have made still made the playoffs this last season running it back w/KAT missing 52 games?

[Note30]

Great post TK.

It's really strange how people confuse "facts" with "perceptions".

A quick breakdown for those that need it, I'll use an example.

Fact: Rudy Gobert is a player for the Minnesota Timberwolves.
Perception: Rudy Gobert is a bad fit for the Minnesota Timberwolves.

Fact: Rudy Gobert is a 3x DPOY in the NBA.
Perception: People are not afraid of him and that is bad.

Facts are what happened. Perceptions are how you feel about them.

Why do you guys come across as Rudys very close friends. TK saying he should get paid for his defending Rudy shows his bias. when people speak about Rudy its not personal I don't think he's a trash player, just a horrible fit for us. If NBA team is better plying at a fast pace, adding a slow center who doesn't spread the floor and other players have to change their game just to make said player minutes worthy is in fact, a bad fit.
If I somehow buy a new hood that's lime green for my wife's black Charger by mistake. Should I tell her to paint the rest of it the same color to make it work? Why is it up to Ant to adjust his game just to accommodate a horrible trade and help ppl save face? Its because he's who he is ta moves should be made to make his life easier. ,Why is that not clear to Kahnnelly? he's supposed to help us, not, fuq us up.

So because we don't hate Rudy, we are his closest friends? There's no potential in between?

When you speak about Rudy, it definitely is personal, as in you are letting your personal feelings cloud your perceptions and weigh them heavily to the negative to confirm your already held bias' against him.

Your hood analogy doesn't quite hit, we aren't buying car parts, those are static (also the color of a hood has no impact on it's performance as a hood and is only superficial). NBA players (and humans) are not static, they are constantly changing with time and experience.

Answer this question and we'll better understand your bias/perception based on the answer:

Do you think the Wolves would have made still made the playoffs this last season running it back w/KAT missing 52 games?

Yeah I do.

The lineup would have been

(DLo/Conley)/Pat Bev/ NAW
Ant / Beasley
McDaniels / Prince
Anderson / Vanderbilt
Kessler / Reid

100% guarantee we'd still be in the same position.

Hell we could have even gotten Clarkson for Beasley, and we definitely would be in a better position.

Or we could have packaged DLo with picks for another better PG.

Any number of things we could have done and we still would have finished the same or better than we did this season.

Kessler is already a watered down version of Rudy.

[Klomp]

If you go by recent history, all the teams that have sent out this level of trade capital expected at minimum finals appearances.
Anthony Davis to the Lakers (title)
Jrue Holiday to the Bucks (title)
Kevin Durant to the Suns (TBD).
PG13 to the Clips (which brought Kawaii Leonard there).
Those teams were expecting to fight for titles when they made those trades.
They weren't looking to make it to the 2nd round.

Before the trade...
The greatest franchise in NBA history just signed the greatest player of all-time in free agency.
Milwaukee had made the playoffs 4 straight years and in most recent seasons won 56 and 60 regular season games.
Phoenix is 1.5 seasons removed from playing in the NBA Finals.
LAC made the playoffs in 7 of the 8 previous seasons.
When we made this trade, we were coming off the second playoff appearance in 18 seasons.

The Kings just lost in the first round. Was their trade for Sabonis a colossal failure?

[Note30]

If you go by recent history, all the teams that have sent out this level of trade capital expected at minimum finals appearances.
Anthony Davis to the Lakers (title)
Jrue Holiday to the Bucks (title)
Kevin Durant to the Suns (TBD).
PG13 to the Clips (which brought Kawaii Leonard there).
Those teams were expecting to fight for titles when they made those trades.
They weren't looking to make it to the 2nd round.

Before the trade...
The greatest franchise in NBA history just signed the greatest player of all-time in free agency.
Milwaukee had made the playoffs 4 straight years and in most recent seasons won 56 and 60 regular season games.
Phoenix is 1.5 seasons removed from playing in the NBA Finals.
LAC made the playoffs in 7 of the 8 previous seasons.
When we made this trade, we were coming off the second playoff appearance in 18 seasons.

The Kings just lost in the first round. Was their trade for Sabonis a colossal failure?

That's a goal post moving argument, the Kings didn't trade their whole wad of future picks for Sabonis they traded 1 player and a bunch of salary filler.

The Sabonis trade is not at all similar to the above trades

If it didn't work out they lost one piece of talent that was good not 6.

[Klomp]

If it didn't work out they lost one piece of talent that was good not 6.

What six pieces of good talent did we trade away?

[Note30]

If it didn't work out they lost one piece of talent that was good not 6.

What six pieces of good talent did we trade away?

Our flexibility in making future trades in 6 draft picks. One of whom is a runner up for Rookie of the Year.

[Baseline81]

Kyle on Flagrant Howls made this point as well, but I'll put my own spin on it a bit...

I spent over 15 years playing Poker from the early 2000's until like 2016 and 6 of those years working professionally in the industry, so I actually have some real world credibility when it comes to poker.

When a player moves "all-in" in a tournament (that doesn't have the ability to buy back in), if their decision is wrong, they no longer exist in that tournament. As a player, it's basically death within that game, you no longer exist and in that game have no value or assets (outside of prize money you may have made based on your finishing place).

Trading 4 FRP, a swap, a rookie, and decent rotational players is A LOT. It's nowhere near "all-in" by any interpretation of the term in theory or reality.

The Wolves lost those things... but that was simply a bet. Still on the table in front of them was:

1.) Anthony Edwards (a #1 pick in his 3nd season who showed a big jump the year before, a willingness/ability to learn, showed that he is a legit player in THE PLAYOFFS at 20 years old) A potential future Super Star.
2.)Karl-Anthony Towns (3× NBA All-Star, 2× All-NBA Third Team, NBA Rookie of the Year on a longterm contract with a willingness to adapt in anyway asked of him to help the team win (whether or not he was capable of making these adaptations, he was willing to try).
3.) Jaden McDaniels, another 3rd year player who is an immerging defensive stopper with legit 2-way potential who was a great value at his pick (a rarity for the Wolves).
4.) DLo's expiring contract (and the player).
5.) Prince - A returning bench vet on a good contract who had been a decent part of the previous year's playoff run with value around the league.
6.) Kyle Anderson - a very solid vet that is adaptable, plays smart, and was a solid part of the team that just knocked your ass out of the playoffs just months earlier.
7.) A bunch of development players that were good deals for their production (or potential production).
8.)Chris Finch - the 2nd most successful coach in Timberwolves history.

Won't even get into the FO or new ownership influence.

Even without having our 1st round picks in 2023, 2025, 2027, and 2029 they still had draft capital:

2023 - 2nd round NYK pick
2024 - 1st round pick (their own)
2026 - 1st round pick (lesser of our pick or Utah's pick), 2nd-round pick (lesser of MIA, IND, or SAS)
2027 - No Picks
2028 - 1st round pick (their own), 2nd round pick (their own)
2029 - No 1st round pick unless it's top 5), 2nd round pick (their own)

Keep in mind we are talking about just before the Gobert trade and what the Wolves still had just after the July 1st trade in draft capital (and note that they've improved it since). 7 draft picks over 7 years, not exactly all of your draft assets.

So.

Inconclusion... I would disagree that the Gobert trade was an "all-in move".

A quick question for you, how many first round draft picks can one team include in a trade?

shrink can correct me, but isn't the answer four due to a restriction on future years as well as the Stepien Rule? If so, that would mean the Wolves dealt every first rounder they possibly could for Gobert.

[TimberKat]

You have some good points about respect other's opinion, be open minded, don't be like a cultists. Doesn't it saying "Rudy is a bad fit period" fall into the same fallacies? Is "Our top payer has said that noboday is scared of Rudy" a little out of context for proof of Gobert's ability or fit? Isn't that a believe and not a fact?

If you are the team's best player, aren't you supposed to make everyone around you better? I just watched the PHX vs DEN game, I see KD and Booker pass out of double teams. I don't see Ayton in their way. I see Murry make cuts and pass to Jokic. Why can't I expect Ant , our best player, to be able to do some of those things? If he can't then should we really build a team around him?

I really should ask Gobert to pay me for making these posts

Great post TK.

It's really strange how people confuse "facts" with "perceptions".

A quick breakdown for those that need it, I'll use an example.

Fact: Rudy Gobert is a player for the Minnesota Timberwolves.
Perception: Rudy Gobert is a bad fit for the Minnesota Timberwolves.

Fact: Rudy Gobert is a 3x DPOY in the NBA.
Perception: People are not afraid of him and that is bad.

Facts are what happened. Perceptions are how you feel about them.

Why do you guys come across as Rudys very close friends. TK saying he should get paid for his defending Rudy shows his bias. when people speak about Rudy its not personal I don't think he's a trash player, just a horrible fit for us. If NBA team is better plying at a fast pace, adding a slow center who doesn't spread the floor and other players have to change their game just to make said player minutes worthy is in fact, a bad fit.
If I somehow buy a new hood that's lime green for my wife's black Charger by mistake. Should I tell her to paint the rest of it the same color to make it work? Why is it up to Ant to adjust his game just to accommodate a horrible trade and help ppl save face? Its because he's who he is ta moves should be made to make his life easier. ,Why is that not clear to Kahnnelly? he's supposed to help us, not, fuq us up.

Let me comment on a couple side points first and will post the basketball responds later. Too many decisive game 4s tonight.

I am not sure what's the logic between I want to get paid to being bias. I do have a day job and this Gobert defense case is taking up too much time granted it's more fun than work. Look, if DLo or Ant pays me, I will get on their side too. Just show me the money!!! I will bring you home DLo.

Who decided Lime green would not work with black? Maybe that is the look we want. I supposed you are one of those people who will donate the car to Kars4Kids because you don't like the color. Give it a try, you may like it. Bias is a B*

https://www.carthrottle.com/post/ndzkp7k/

https://www.pinterest.com/pin/100275529180375385/

https://www.google.com/url?sa=i&url=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.jayley.com%2Fus%2Fwomenswear-c1%2Fjayley-black-and-lime-green-oversized-contrast-coat-in-faux-leather-p10778&psig=AOvVaw35Fet1VEN661Hc2vCO86bi&ust=1683687236273000&source=images&cd=vfe&ved=0CA0QjRxqFwoTCLCH3-6d5_4CFQAAAAAdAAAAABAE

[shrink]

A quick question for you, how many first round draft picks can one team include in a trade?

shrink can correct me, but isn't the answer four due to a restriction on future years as well as the Stepien Rule? If so, that would mean the Wolves dealt every first rounder they possibly could for Gobert.

You’re right. There is a rule (conveniently referred to as “the seven year rule!”) which limits teams from trading picks farther than seven years out. So if Stepian means it’s every other year, then a team can trade a 1st in the next draft, two years later, two years later, and two years later, so Years 1, 3, 5, 7 = four picks.

However, the Stepian Rule only requires that you don’t make a trade that could possibly leave a team without a 1st round pick in alternating years. That means if a team had additional picks (from other teams), they could include them and technically offer more than 4 first rounders. For example OKC can probably offer 7-8 picks, but still finish the deal and be Stepian compliant.

But yes, I tend to look at it as four picks in most cases.

[Folklore]

Why do you guys come across as Rudys very close friends. TK saying he should get paid for his defending Rudy shows his bias. when people speak about Rudy its not personal I don't think he's a trash player, just a horrible fit for us. If NBA team is better plying at a fast pace, adding a slow center who doesn't spread the floor and other players have to change their game just to make said player minutes worthy is in fact, a bad fit.
If I somehow buy a new hood that's lime green for my wife's black Charger by mistake. Should I tell her to paint the rest of it the same color to make it work? Why is it up to Ant to adjust his game just to accommodate a horrible trade and help ppl save face? Its because he's who he is ta moves should be made to make his life easier. ,Why is that not clear to Kahnnelly? he's supposed to help us, not, fuq us up.

So because we don't hate Rudy, we are his closest friends? There's no potential in between?

When you speak about Rudy, it definitely is personal, as in you are letting your personal feelings cloud your perceptions and weigh them heavily to the negative to confirm your already held bias' against him.

Your hood analogy doesn't quite hit, we aren't buying car parts, those are static (also the color of a hood has no impact on it's performance as a hood and is only superficial). NBA players (and humans) are not static, they are constantly changing with time and experience.

Answer this question and we'll better understand your bias/perception based on the answer:

Do you think the Wolves would have made still made the playoffs this last season running it back w/KAT missing 52 games?

Yeah I do.

The lineup would have been

(DLo/Conley)/Pat Bev/ NAW
Ant / Beasley
McDaniels / Prince
Anderson / Vanderbilt
Kessler / Reid

100% guarantee we'd still be in the same position.

Hell we could have even gotten Clarkson for Beasley, and we definitely would be in a better position.

Or we could have packaged DLo with picks for another better PG.

Any number of things we could have done and we still would have finished the same or better than we did this season.

Kessler is already a watered down version of Rudy.

Thank you Note I agree

I'm going to add that of course I know that the players are people, I base some of my opinions off of that. like KAT being a weather man who just happens to be tall and talented at basketball a because of that he does the awkward and cringe things he does. I was mad at Rosas's whole "family" angle and then he trades ROCO and they then make this huge trade to get rid of Ants mentors and best friend on the team.Ant is a child who lost his mom and grandmother and is now sleeping with a woman in her 30s with a kid from chief kief and was the one in the video. no wonder he followed pat around. finally an adult he can look up to.
I take all of the players feelings into account.We had a bad start to the season because of the personal impact of losing their friends and now they have to cater to the new guy who doesn't fit and also have to watch the old mates play with Lebron and win a chip lol

I still think that the hood analogy still works. Mike here to make the Rudy trade look better.AHH AHH AHHH before you go there..I didn't say Mike was a bad player. In the gran scheme his playing well just came along with the coverup. Mike is t best a stopgap and does not follow Ants timeline. there were definitely more trades to be had. at minimum its just another adult in the room gone from Ants life.

[TimberKat]

Why I still like the Gobert trade:

1. I am sick and tired of watching this team get pick-n-roll to death in the past. With Conley and Gobert, I see a huge improvement.
2. Our rebounding and defense were the major problem last year. Running on berserker mode on D can only get so far and is not sustainable. I think with Gobert, we were a top 10 defense (someone please confirm). I still see room for improvement next year, so not willing to donate Gobert to Kars4Kids. Ex: our guards learn to block out, Towns in the right spot, Gobert be more aggressive on blocks.
3. I don’t worry about Gobert’s fit with Ant because as I explained on the other thread that it is a learn issue with Ant. It is not Ant needs to sacrifice his game or it will stunt his growth because Gobert.
4. Gobert will reduce the ware and tear of both Towns and Ant
5. Towns played better with a center anyway and we can’t get Bam. Gobert is good enough.
6. I see we can leverage Gobert more on offense despite his short comings

You don’t need to be related to Gobert to like him. You just need to care about the defensive side of the game and know how bad we were before this year. We paid too much but no reason to cry over spilled milk when there is still a path to success. I still want to get paid, Connelly.

[urinesane]

Answer this question and we'll better understand your bias/perception based on the answer:

Do you think the Wolves would have made still made the playoffs this last season running it back w/KAT missing 52 games?

Yeah I do.

The lineup would have been

(DLo/Conley)/Pat Bev/ NAW
Ant / Beasley
McDaniels / Prince
Anderson / Vanderbilt
Kessler / Reid

100% guarantee we'd still be in the same position.

Hell we could have even gotten Clarkson for Beasley, and we definitely would be in a better position.

Or we could have packaged DLo with picks for another better PG.

Any number of things we could have done and we still would have finished the same or better than we did this season.

Kessler is already a watered down version of Rudy.

The lineup would have been
DLO/PatBev
Ant/Beasley
McDaniels/Prince
Anderson/Vando
KAT/Reid/Kessler (I doubt Kessler would have been the starter right away even with KAT down).

You can't assume that the DLo for Conley/NAW trade would have still happened, just who we know we would have had going into the season (not saying it couldn't still happen, but that we can't know for sure).

Not sure how you can 100% guarantee a hypothetical (seems non-sensical), but I personally don't think that roster minus KAT for most of the year wins more than 35 games (considering how badly PatBev/Beasley played this season and the fact that Reid would have been forced to start a decent amount of games without Rudy to fall back on).

Maybe I should start another poll to see what others think about that hypothetical.

[Note30]

Answer this question and we'll better understand your bias/perception based on the answer:

Do you think the Wolves would have made still made the playoffs this last season running it back w/KAT missing 52 games?

Yeah I do.

The lineup would have been

(DLo/Conley)/Pat Bev/ NAW
Ant / Beasley
McDaniels / Prince
Anderson / Vanderbilt
Kessler / Reid

100% guarantee we'd still be in the same position.

Hell we could have even gotten Clarkson for Beasley, and we definitely would be in a better position.

Or we could have packaged DLo with picks for another better PG.

Any number of things we could have done and we still would have finished the same or better than we did this season.

Kessler is already a watered down version of Rudy.

The lineup would have been
DLO/PatBev
Ant/Beasley
McDaniels/Prince
Anderson/Vando
KAT/Reid/Kessler (I doubt Kessler would have been the starter right away even with KAT down).

You can't assume that the DLo for Conley/NAW trade would have still happened, just who we know we would have had going into the season (not saying it couldn't still happen, but that we can't know for sure).

Not sure how you can 100% guarantee a hypothetical (seems non-sensical), but I personally don't think that roster minus KAT for most of the year wins more than 35 games (considering how badly PatBev/Beasley played this season and the fact that Reid would have been forced to start a decent amount of games without Rudy to fall back on).

Maybe I should start another poll to see what others think about that hypothetical.

Dude are you just being argumentative?! YOU asked what the lineup would look like without KAT. So I made one without him and you added him back on.

I think we would have made the would make the playoffs, he's already pretty similar to Gobert we'd get less production from him. Go ahead start the poll.

I'm saying Kessler would have provided similar value just like he did in Utah. He started 40 games for them despite Vando, Markannen, and Olynyk all in the same position. I'm sure he would have been fine here.

Watch Markannen tape, he's already a decent replacement for Rudy he does exactly the same things except he has more of an offensive game.

Yeah the Conley trade might not have happened we may have moved for another PG or a better one.

Pat Bev played roughly the same for the Lakers and Bulls as he did for us, he just didn't have the same effect on the Lakers. He actually gets some of credit for the Bulls run and defense in the latter half of the year.

Beasley didn't play wildly different either, just slightly worse. But personally I don't see him as a massive needle mover either way.

Vando would have come in super helpful throughout all of this, plus the leadership Bev brought. Add in a semi decent replacement for Rudy in Kessler and we would have shaped up the same.

But go ahead make the poll.