NBA 2020-21 Season - Game Day Thread (Bring Back The Wolf Pit!)

[Mox]

1 minute ago, CWood21 said:

He's due over $65M over the next 2 seasons.  He's definitely not coming off of his best year unless you're talking strictly about his shooting percentages.  He's a high volume scorer who doesn't play well within the offensive system, and doesn't offer any real value on the court.  He might not be the worst contract anymore, but he's still significantly negative in value.  When you have to argue that he's needed because of salary matching purposes, that means he doesn't really offer much in the way of value on-court.  Wiseman was a flop this year, so his value has gone down since a year ago.  That's an okay package.  Not a great package.

After FA he won't be making a top 30 salary in either of the next two seasons. By impact numbers, efficiency, and defensive metrics it was his best season. He proved that he can be a 3 & D guy on a good team. He's not going to be some massive postseason liability either. Wiseman's value is down but he's still a 19 year old #2 overall pick loaded with talent. Is he the next Bagley? Potentially, but he also still has the ability to be a better scoring Capela and that's a valuable player. 

[beekay414]

Why are people saying Wiggins has proven he can be a guy on a good team? The Warriors weren't good.

[J-ALL-DAY]

42 minutes ago, sdrawkcab321 said:

Would they want Wiggins? What value does he have at this point?

How else would they be able to match salaries with just picks and a player or two on their rookie deals?

Wiggins is not a bum, he's a solid player and made big strides defensively last season. Blazers would be able to flip him if they wanted to.

Do I think the Blazers trade him to us? I don't, but package wise you are not going to find many better, especially for a team that will then start rebuilding.

Where does CJ end up after Dame gets moved?

[J-ALL-DAY]

12 minutes ago, beekay414 said:

Why are people saying Wiggins has proven he can be a guy on a good team? The Warriors weren't good.

With Steph they were a team that would have won 50 or so games in a normal 82 game season. Regardless if you want to say they were good or not, he did things that are valuable to a winning team.....And that was play defense at a fairly high level and shoot a good percentage from the three point line on 5 attempts a game. A guy that can get you nearly 20 PPG, play good defense and shoot the ball at an above average rate from down town isn't a negative contract as CWood and others have stated. 

[beekay414]

4 minutes ago, J-ALL-DAY said:

With Steph they were a team that would have won 50 or so games in a normal 82 game season.

Not really tbqh. You guys paced closer to a .500 team with him until the end of the season when you got Sacramento, Houston, New Orleans and OKC for 5 easy Ws at the end of the season. So it depends on how you wanna define "good" in this regard.

[CWood21]

32 minutes ago, Bullet Club said:

After FA he won't be making a top 30 salary in either of the next two seasons. By impact numbers, efficiency, and defensive metrics it was his best season. He proved that he can be a 3 & D guy on a good team. He's not going to be some massive postseason liability either. Wiseman's value is down but he's still a 19 year old #2 overall pick loaded with talent. Is he the next Bagley? Potentially, but he also still has the ability to be a better scoring Capela and that's a valuable player. 

In 1 year, he'll be a neutral asset because he's an expiring contract.  But right now, he's got 2 years of overpaid salary.  In 2 years, Russell Westbrook and John Wall won't be toxic contracts, but you don't see me parading around their trade values.  He's wildly overpaid for what he's producing.  You're not paying $30M+ for a 3&D wing.  That's bad economics.  Wiseman wasn't good this year and he was hobbled.  His value is way down.  He's probably closer to Bagley then he is a franchise player at this point.  Hopefully he rebounds next year.  But if your barometer is being better than Capela that's not really a high standard.

[CWood21]

26 minutes ago, beekay414 said:

Why are people saying Wiggins has proven he can be a guy on a good team? The Warriors weren't good.

Because it fits an argument.

[seminoles1]

26 minutes ago, beekay414 said:

Why are people saying Wiggins has proven he can be a guy on a good team? The Warriors weren't good.

It was moreso the way he played that proved it. He showed more consistency on defense and better shooting efficiency in a lessened role, which is something people doubted he could do. A high end 3&D guy because he does bring more shot creating juice than someone like Jae Crowder or Danny Green.

He's (very) overpaid. He's not bad. He's a 4th starter on a good team that can match salaries, a slight bonus in this instance instead of Portland (or whoever is moving an expensive star) having to create 3-team trades or take on 3 extra players.

[CWood21]

2 minutes ago, seminoles1 said:

It was moreso the way he played that proved it. He showed more consistency on defense and better shooting efficiency in a lessened role, which is something people doubted he could do. A high end 3&D guy because he does bring more shot creating juice than someone like Jae Crowder or Danny Green.

He's (very) overpaid. He's not bad. He's a 4th starter on a good team that can match salaries, a slight bonus in this instance instead of Portland (or whoever is moving an expensive star) having to create 3-team trades or take on 3 extra players.

Again, $30M+ for a 3&D wing is horrible use of the cap.  There's no way to slice it.  He's a bad contract.  And that's assuming he can continue to play as well as he did last year.

[J-ALL-DAY]

9 minutes ago, beekay414 said:

Not really tbqh. You guys paced closer to a .500 team with him until the end of the season when you got Sacramento, Houston, New Orleans and OKC for 5 easy Ws at the end of the season. So it depends on how you wanna define "good" in this regard.

Paced closer to .500 because the team went 1-7 without Steph. 

38-26 with him, 1-7 without him. 

Again though, even if you don't think the team wasn't "good," that doesn't take away from what I said about Wiggins. All was true. 

[Mox]

2 minutes ago, CWood21 said:

In 1 year, he'll be a neutral asset because he's an expiring contract.  But right now, he's got 2 years of overpaid salary.  In 2 years, Russell Westbrook and John Wall won't be toxic contracts, but you don't see me parading around their trade values.  He's wildly overpaid for what he's producing.  You're not paying $30M+ for a 3&D wing.  That's bad economics.  Wiseman wasn't good this year and he was hobbled.  His value is way down.  He's probably closer to Bagley then he is a franchise player at this point.  Hopefully he rebounds next year.  But if your barometer is being better than Capela that's not really a high standard.

None of that even makes sense. Wiggins only has two years left on his deal. If he is traded, that's all that is left for him. He won't be making top 30 money at any point going forward. Is he still seriously overpaid? Of course. He's also a solid starter and can fill a valuable role on any team. Again, you have to a high paid guy to deal Dame and match salaries. John Wall and Russell Westbrook will be the 2nd and 3rd highest paid players in the NBA next season and both have critical flaws that make them worse in the postseason.

Capela is one of the best defensive bigs in the league and impactful everywhere he goes. You are severely underrating him. This is almost bad as your 'Anthony Davis is better offensively than Jokic' take last year.

[J-ALL-DAY]

The Wiseman hate is crazy. He was a guy that averaged 11/6/1 in 21 minutes (20/10/2 per 36 mins) as a 19 year old with no college experience. He did all that while not knowing how to play and not being put in the best situation to succeed. He sucked defensively but how many 19 year old bigs excel on that side of the ball anyways? The only reason some Warriors fans want him traded is because they want to win now while Steph is still great and getting a proven star helps more than Wiseman. But dude is far from a bum or someone who didn't flash at all as a rookie. 

[NYRaider]

41 minutes ago, beekay414 said:

Why are people saying Wiggins has proven he can be a guy on a good team? The Warriors weren't good.

Because he had 47%/38% shooting splits, the same as Beal, so obviously if he would've just taken 10 more shots per game he would've been a 30+ ppg scorer. 

[CWood21]

2 minutes ago, Bullet Club said:

None of that even makes sense. Wiggins only has two years left on his deal. If he is traded, that's all that is left for him. He won't be making top 30 money at any point going forward. Is he still seriously overpaid? Of course. He's also a solid starter and can fill a valuable role on any team. Again, you have to a high paid guy to deal Dame and match salaries. John Wall and Russell Westbrook will be the 2nd and 3rd highest paid players in the NBA next season and both have critical flaws that make them worse in the postseason.

You literally just made the argument that because he's a FA in 2 years, he won't be grossly overpaid.  That doesn't change the fact that TODAY he's grossly overpaid.  You don't pay $30M+ to a solid starter.  You're expecting star production when you're paying that much.  And the player you're describing are of value to teams with their stars in place.  If Portland trades Dame, then they don't have a star in place ergo Wiggins value is limited and he's back to his Minnesota days when you've got an okay player putting up inefficient numbers on a bad team.

4 minutes ago, Bullet Club said:

Capela is one of the best defensive bigs in the league and impactful everywhere he goes. You are severely underrating him. This is almost bad as your 'Anthony Davis is better offensively than Jokic' take last year.

Yet Houston traded him AND a FRP for Robert Covington.  That's so incredibly valuable.

[CWood21]

2 minutes ago, J-ALL-DAY said:

The Wiseman hate is crazy. He was a guy that averaged 11/6/1 in 21 minutes (20/10/2 per 36 mins) as a 19 year old with no college experience. He did all that while not knowing how to play and not being put in the best situation to succeed. He sucked defensively but how many 19 year old bigs excel on that side of the ball anyways? The only reason some Warriors fans want him traded is because they want to win now while Steph is still great and getting a proven star helps more than Wiseman. But dude is far from a bum or someone who didn't flash at all as a rookie. 

Nobody is arguing he's a bust.  Nobody is saying there isn't hope for him.  But based on what he's done this far, there's nothing to suggest he's a future star in the making.  If he wasn't the #2 pick last year, we probably wouldn't be talking about him as a significant piece of a trade package for Dame.