A Message for Rudy
by Stop-n-Pop on Oct 8, 2009 9:26 PM CDT
Email
Print
One of the things that we have tried to do over the years on this site is to foster a sense of interest in advanced stats among casual basketball fans. Only knowing about points, assists, rebounds and free throw percentages is no way to go through life and we wouldn't wish that upon even the worst of our enemies. Well...maybe one or two people.
I myself try to include as much basic-level stat-geekery as possible in my posts in hopes that they can provide something a tad more objective than simply saying that Player X looks better than Player Y when talking about the latest and greatest game. Even if no such distinction really exists, at least it makes for some fun discussion with clear parameters for everyone involved.
As long-time readers of the site know, this deference to geekery tends to color my view of who is and who isn't a good player. I tend to favor offensively-minded efficient players who can play at least two positions and who excel in adj +/- categories. I'd love nothing more than to see a Jason Kidd, Kevin Martin, Andrei Kirilenko, Dirk Nowitzki, Pau Gasol starting five.
That being said, there are a few players I like simply for...well, even after looking as hard as I can at their stats, I don't have a solid case to make why I'd love to see them on my favorite squad other than that I think they simply look like they can ball like very few others. One of these players is Rudy Gay.
I don't think there is any other human on planet earth who has won more from the basketball genetic lottery than Mr. Gay. 6'8" with a 7'3" wingspan and a nearly 9' standing reach to go along with a 40+ inch vertical and the agility of a shooting guard. All of this in a player who is only 23 and headed into his 4th professional season. It's absurd.
Rudy is not an efficient player. He's not a particularly good defender. There have been questions about his effort in Memphis. Sometimes he does little more than sit out on the perimeter and wait for long jumpers. We've all heard the knocks and we're all familiar with them.
I want the Wolves to take a run at Rudy for the following reasons:
- He is 23 and entering his 4th professional season. He's right in the age wheelhouse that the Wolves need to be looking at.
- He has the talent and physical package to transcend a bad stat sheet, in theory.
- During the Olympic try outs Gay showcased the dynamic, versatile game that could (and should) make him an unguardable offensive force in the league for the next 5-6 years.
- Rudy fits right into the Wolves' free agent wheel house; entering the market when most eyes are on Tier A players like LeBron and D-Wade and no one will be left with as much cash as Our Beloved Puppies to spend on players in Tier B.
Over the course of the summer I put together a few drafts for posts that broke down Gay's stat line and potential. Let's make one thing clear before I wrap this up: It's not like there's nothing there to look at; the guy had a very nice sophomore season and there is probably a lot to be said about the negative aspects of playing in a crappy situation like Memphis (and I do still plan on making a post where we look at what his stat sheet has to offer). After reading these posts, they really didn't hit home with the main reason why I want the Wolves to go after Gay: It's a gamble on a player with a huge risk/reward quotient. His upper-level fits perfectly into each and everything the Wolves are looking for: an athletic player on the wing who can excel in transition, take his defender off the dribble, make quick plays, and hit the outside shot when it comes his way. No matter what David Kahn does or does not do in the next 2-3 years, the Wolves are still going to need some luck making it to the top. That's just the nature of the NBA; competence gets you 45-55 wins; you need to luck into a LeBron, Kobe, Duncan, D-Wade, Shaq, or MJ to do the rest. Gay is probably not that type of player but I'm pretty sure the Wolves aren't getting that sort of guy in the draft and I don't like their chances for a 2010 Tier A kind of guy.
Signing or trading for Gay would be a huge risk for the Wolves. I'm not going to argue that point. What it would also be is a home run swing for a club with 3 additional 1st rounders, cap space, Ricky Rubio, Nikola Pekovic, and a new up-tempo offense. Let's say the Wolves can turn their 3 draft picks into someone like Evan Turner in 2010 or Harrison Barnes in 2011. Toss in Rudy Gay and the 2 stashed Euros and suddenly you're looking at this:
- Rubio/Flynn/Sessions
- Turner/Sessions/Brewer
- Gay/Turner/Brewer/Gomes
- Love/Pekovic/Gomes/Hollins
- Jefferson/Pekovic/Hollins
That's a team that can go toe-to-toe with any young team in the league in terms of talent and potential. It also has tremendous flexibility in what type of lineup you can trot out on the floor. You could go long and defensive:
- Rubio
- Brewer
- Turner
- Jefferson
- Hollins
You could go up tempo and crazy:
- Flynn
- Sessions
- Gay
- Love
- Hollins
You could go 1/2 court pick and roll/in and out:
- Flynn
- Turner
- Gay
- Love
- Jefferson
You get the picture.
Anywho, I know this post is somewhat anti-climatic in terms of putting together a good argument for Rudy Gay but I really couldn't be honest with all y'all if I didn't say that there was something kind of emotional here; I want to see the Wolves swing for the fences and take a chance in free agency (or trade) on someone like Gay...or Thad Young and Danilio Gallinari....but that's a topic for another post.
What say you?
56 comments
|
0 recs |
Do you like this story?
Comments
Couldn't have said it better
He was the guy I wanted in that draft, just for the fact that he’s absurdly talented and had (still has) huge potential. There are few players in the league with that kind of ability. I still don’t think people understand the combination of skill and athleticism he has. Yes, he could be the classic underachiever. He already has to this point, but with our style, roster, and generally more healthy and bright situation (how sad is that?), I think there’s enough there to be optimistic about if we could ever get him.
Like you said, he’s fits what we need perfectly and would be a great piece to add to a future contender if everything you outlined (hopefully) occurs as planned. There really aren’t many players we could get with our cap space that fit as well as he does in terms of age, cost, ability, and roster situation.
He’d make a lot more sense to me than an older injury prone player with a bigger contract or a “diamond in the rough” type. I know a lot of people here want a Gerald Wallace/Kirilenko type, but that seems there’s just as much risk (maybe more so) and less of a possible reward. Let alone not as good of a value or skill-set fit or age window. Also, guys like Douglas-Roberts and his ilk are too low-upside to be worth much more than a bench spot, even with development. We don’t need another Gomes, which is likely their talent ceiling. A player in the Gay, Iguodala, Granger, etc mold would be perfect. Hard to get, but that’s the type of target I’d focus on.
I would definitely rather have
Gay than Wallace et al.
by TheEvilProfessor on Oct 9, 2009 9:17 AM CDT up reply actions
Meh. I guess it depends on your philosophy as to how to build a team. I think it’s highly possible that adding a known quantity type of vet will make more sense after this year because we’ll already be overflowing with young talent from our draft picks.
Gay gives you another shot at a star with a young, athletic guy, true, but he’s a complete gamble. At some point we have to decide to go all-in and make a real push, and adding a guy who can give you proven production could be the step the team needs. It’s not like we’ll be hurting for high-ceiling young guys with Rubio, Flynn, Sessions, Love and next year’s picks.
Jennings: F*** the Knicks, them n***** is always going to be weak.
I just think
that the ideal situation would be to not load up too fast. You still don’t know whether or not your core is enough. If you load up your put your self between a rock and a hard place. While we think at this point that they will be, we need to see their development first. After that we can debate whether to go young potential or slightly older vet to get the most out of our core.
by TheEvilProfessor on Oct 9, 2009 10:23 AM CDT up reply actions
At the very least
They’d be highly entertaining, and probably score 100+ more often than not. And despite what people may say, that’s worth something.
"Come on Eddie, let's get serious."
I also wanted Gay in the Foye/Roy draft and would love to see us make a move for him. While the stats may not bear this out, I’d prefer Gay over Joe Johnson. Primarily b/c of age and my belief that Johnson will cost more.
However, I can’t envision an 11 man rotation and a scenario in which Gay, Gomes, Brewer and an Evan Turner are on the same roster. Not enough minutes to go around there. I also doubt Session, Rubio and Flynn are ever sharing PT.
Agreed.
That hypothetical line-up, assuming Gay, Turner, Rubio, and Pekovic are all good NBA players, could be the most talented and stacked in the league. Something would have to give. Although I guess we wouldn’t necessarily have to give up any of the point guards, picks, or Pekovic to end up with all those players… interesting.
I think the bottom line here is that the Wolves, in terms of trade ammunition, are really loaded. Maybe more so than people realize. Even without including expiring contracts, which would no longer exist by the time we’re ready to fire, we could trade one or two probably starting-quality points, the best post scorer in Europe, and up to up to three first-round draft picks. Without touching Love, Jefferson, or Flynn, couldn’t we bag an elite, elite player with that package?
Trading for a superstar is the 1st choice
but if, for all our trade assets, we can’t work something out, I think the next best thing would be to try to retain more depth than we think we need. Look at the three best “non-superstar” teams of the past decade: the ’00 Blazers, the ’02 Kings, and the ’04 Pistons.
The Blazers had Bonzi Wells, Detlef Schrempf, Brian Grant, and young Jermaine O’Neal.
The Kings had 6th man of the year Bobby Jackson, Hedo Turkuglu, young Gerald Wallace, and 15 PER Scot Pollard.
The Pistons had crazy front line size and depth, rotating the Wallaces with Okur and Campbell to match up with anyone. Their bench guards were less impressive, though Corliss Williamson and Lindsay Hunter did well for them.
I agree
And the main reason those last two teams fell off was because their bench did. The Kings lost Wallace in the expansion draft and traded Turkoglu and Pollard for Brad Miller, then had to play Rodney Buford in Game 7 against the Wolves because Jackson was hurt and Peeler suckerpunched KG. The Pistons couldn’t keep Okur because the Jazz paid him too much; traded Williamson for Derrick Coleman; let Mike James (who was a decent bench guy) walk without replacing him; lost Wallace and tried to replace him with Nazr Mohammed. I think the key is to always have a few more assets than needed and keep them until the last possible minute.
Maybe the key in all of this ends up being the player-development and regional scouting arms of the franchise, because that’s how they’d be able to replenish their talent on the cheap. The Twins have no players left from their first division-winning squad yet still have only finished under .500 once since Gardenhire took over (4 games under).
by pagingstanleyroberts on Oct 9, 2009 10:22 AM CDT up reply actions
I like Gay as well, but I think some other guys I would like to have instead are Kevin Martin, Granger, Devin Harris, Iguodala, and Durant. I have no idea which ones would even be available, but I’m just wishing anyway. I know Lebron or D Wade are not coming.
Yeah, any player like that would be great
Those are tough players to get, though. Really the only way you get those types of players is if you take a gamble through a trade or risk of overpayment. Or by taking garbage contracts also. Even then there’s not a lot of possibilities. Like SnP said and like I’ve come to understand, it’s gonna take some luck to get where we want to. Maybe that luck has come to us through Rubio down the road, but we’ll likely need some breaks in the coming years.
If available
I would really like to see Granger or Iguodala on the Wolves. But, I have a hard time believing players like that would get traded. The Grizzlies have enabled ridiculous trade wishes.
Yeah, that's the glimmer of hope
As long as Michael Heisley’s pulling the strings on some personnel decisions, you never know what they’ll do. Probably won’t make a difference in our situation, but it does encourage a lot of pipe dreams.
SnP
Where do you go for this advanced basketball analysis you talk about? I spend a lot of time looking at advanced metrics for baseball, but haven’t found the same type of sites for basketball. Any sites that I should go to? Thanks
by lookatthosetwins on Oct 8, 2009 10:52 PM CDT reply actions
Here are a few that I know about off the top of my head
basketball-reference.com, basketballprospectus.com, 82games.com
The Player Season Finder on basketball-reference is huge fun
When you’re trying to figure out what a young bench player could become, for example:
http://www.basketball-reference.com/fc/psl_finder.cgi
Lets you do searches like “What young players have ever played this many minutes while turning the ball over so danged much?” You get search terms like:
For single seasons, in the regular season, from 1983-84 to 2008-09, from 1st to 5th season, requiring Turnover Pct >= 20 and Minutes Played >= 2000, sorted by descending Turnover Pct.
Check out...
….the stats/reference link list in the sidebar. My favorite stat sites are www.knickerblogger.net, www.82games.com, www.basketballvalue.com, and www.basketballprospectus.com (check out the card page). Later today I’ll put up a post about the newly available Basketball Prospectus book.
Forever splitting the Cheechakos from the Sourdoughs
www.canishoopus.com
Memphis is bad, that's a good point
Well, bad may not be accurate. Awful. Horrible. Mind-numbingly, logic-defyingly, cringe-inducing bad.
I definitely agree Gay is phenomenally talented, and the reports he was the second best performer at Team USA camp (behind only Durant) was encouraging.
I question all the things most question, particularly his passion for the game. And while he is sharing the ball with Mayo now, he’s also NOT sharing it with Pau Gasol or Mike Miller.
But this is a very very good argument to bring up….Memphis has no freakin clue what it’s doing. Anyone with eyes can see it’s not a good situation to be developing young talent in. Hopefully the prospect of a new contract can get him going again, because he was stellar his first two years, and getting out of Memphis is ten times more motivation than the Grizz can offer him by staying and tryong to accomplish something with that team.
I have to admit I haven’t watched enough of Gay to really know anything. He definitly was in the mix with Roy/Foye and I switched back and forth between all 3 of them (before settling for Foye on draft night)…
As for swinging for the fences … with all the cards we’ve got, we’ve got to at least swing for the fences with one of them. Since this draft isn’t really shaping up to be one for that (want Evan Turner) .. I’m really looking forward to free agency this summer… Though I wouldn’t be suprised if Kahn brings in a tierA player .. remember, this is Kahn, not McHale.
I also like to start the discussion on Gallinari. Maybe I’d like to put up a fan post about him but I really haven’t got the knowledge (haven’t watched him play) or the time (working overtime a.t.m.) .. so what’s you guy’s take on this kid.
If the Knicks really want Rubio … Gallinari + unprotected 2010 first round pick for Rubio .. or something along those lines… I’d do it.
How do you guys think he’d fit? His shooting would really give some balance to the roster, he’s also long .. but probably not athletic enough? I’m intrigued though.
Official Kahn/Rambis band-wagon rider since 2009
If RealGM's NY posters are any indication
there’s no chance of anything there.
Knicks’ fans view of Galinari is one of those strange phenomena where a team is so moribund that all hope becomes irrationally tied to one, young, possibly talented player. The same thing is going on in Golden State with Anthony “Magic Garnett” Randolph. They become untouchable, even though based on their actual production they shouldn’t be.
Their 2010 1st rounder belongs to Utah, so your trade proposal couldn’t happen. Anyway, it seems any trades involving Gallinari have to involve taking back Curry, which is a huge no-no.
meh; too bad; thx 4 the reply
Official Kahn/Rambis band-wagon rider since 2009
by Wim (Belgium) on Oct 9, 2009 8:30 AM CDT up reply actions
Checked it out at the SB Nation blog and it seems you’re right .. I don’t really get it but he’s off the list.
Official Kahn/Rambis band-wagon rider since 2009
by Wim (Belgium) on Oct 11, 2009 4:31 PM CDT up reply actions
Exactly wat i was thinking
BTW, wat are your thoughts on drafting Cole Aldrich, i am very high on him and I thin he can help this team in many ways.
I was really hoping..
..Aldrich would have entered the draft. He’d be fantastic on the Wolves.
Forever splitting the Cheechakos from the Sourdoughs
www.canishoopus.com
Hindsight and all that,
but man would Aldrich in the draft have made for superb offseason for the Wolves. Assuming he would have slipped to 5th/6th, adding Aldrich and either Rubio or Flynn in the draft, and Sessions and Hollins at a bargain FA contract would have checked off everything but “add a Top Ten starter at the three” to the offseason to-do list.
Yeah.. The returning freshmen from last year killed this draft. Imagine if Turner, Aminu, Monroe and Aldridge were all in this year’s draft instead of returning.
Jennings: F*** the Knicks, them n***** is always going to be weak.
And before anyone nitpicks that last post, Turner was a soph. My apologies :)
Jennings: F*** the Knicks, them n***** is always going to be weak.
On the flip side...
They deepen a draft next year in which the Wolves potentially have 3 top-20 picks.
by pagingstanleyroberts on Oct 9, 2009 10:24 AM CDT up reply actions
Making the draft this year even more adroitly handled
That Charlotte pick essentially kicked the draft assets can one year down the sidewalk ahead of Kahn. Rubio fell, so the “move up” kit didn’t need to even get used on him.
The Wolves are going to be huge players next summer.
Anybody see this as a legit possibility?
There’s no possible way this Memphis roster gets through the season without at least one chemistry issue.
One of Mayo, Iverson, or Gay will whine about their shots. When one of them starts publically complaining, one of them might be on the outs.
Depending on Gay’s early season performance, his expiring contract might make him a candidate to be the one traded.
If it’s possible we can get him this season, is that something we look at?
Since he’s restricted, we’d get the option to match any offers in 2010, right?
You didn't even mention...
Zach Randolph. That team is going to be a freaking train wreck this year.
"I'm gonna make you cry...I'm gonna make you cry and dip my cookie in your tears!!!"
They are..
…definitely a League Pass curiosity.
Forever splitting the Cheechakos from the Sourdoughs
www.canishoopus.com
I'm not necessarily opposed to Rudy Gay
But I must say this post makes me nervous. Essentially, SnP is saying: I have a process. I believe in that process. I believe in that relatively objective, stat-based process, because I understand that our eyes often lie to us. However, I’m abandoning that process because…Rudy Gay looks really good in a basketball uniform.
Isn’t that EXACTLY what the process is designed to avoid?
But..
…we’re talking about Memphis ;) It’s like a vortex of suck that renders our normal physics incomprehensible.
Forever splitting the Cheechakos from the Sourdoughs
www.canishoopus.com
Sounds like he’s got a bit of a man crush :)
I understand the idea of bringing in the best talent possible, and Rudy has unbelievable potential, but he needs to show more. I can’t help but feel like he’s going to demand a big deal based on his high scoring average and athleticism, meaning we’d have to pay him an amount disproportionate to what we can reasonably expect him to produce on the court.
If he’s available for a fair deal, then I would be OK with it. I don’t think it’s a slam dunk idea unless he gives us reason to think he’s going to make good on that potential when he leaves Memphis. Yeah, maybe Memphis is dragging him down, but if he wants to get paid he needs to focus on improving, not chucking up bad shots and loafing on D. Now, if he makes a big jump forward, then he becomes a much more attractive target in my eyes. I guess it all depends on what happens this year.
Jennings: F*** the Knicks, them n***** is always going to be weak.
I think....
….he can be had on the relative cheap. In a world where Sessions got what he did and where we may see a lowering of the cap/lux mark, I don’t think he gets what he would have gotten had he been a free agent 2-3 years ago.
Forever splitting the Cheechakos from the Sourdoughs
www.canishoopus.com
Very true. The time they are a changin’ indeed.
Still, he’s all potential and is a RFA, so based on any logical thought process, Memphis should match a fair deal. Granted, this is Memphis so logic probably flies out the window, but I still wonder. I’ll admit to not knowing their lux status off the top of my head – if they’re up against it and we can make a hard push by offering him just enough to make it really costly for Mem to match like we did with Sessions, then that’s cool. If they aren’t really hurting, though, why wouldn’t they match something like 5 years 40 million, which is probably fair if he improves at all next season.
Jennings: F*** the Knicks, them n***** is always going to be weak.
They are significantly below the luxury tax
But I could see where they trade him for a pick if there are clashes between Mayo, Randolph and AI. I think that Gay would be better off playing for the qualified offer and then becoming a FA. Memphis will just screw him otherwise.
by TheEvilProfessor on Oct 9, 2009 10:20 AM CDT up reply actions
If that's really true, when will we know it?
If the value of someone like Gay was to fall, how exactly would that look over time? Would Memphis recognize it at the trading deadline? Would the RFA status cause him to float along like Sessions, to use your comparison?
I would not particularly be eager for the Wolves to spend their offseason flat-footedly waiting on Rudy Gay’s market to define itself, while all the other movers and shakers were actively pursuing FA targets higher in the food chain.
My Position Remains Unchanged
Eric’s points are right on. Gay’s current production isn’t worth more than the MLE. SNP acknowledges all the reasons for this.
This discussion comes down to how you feel about “Risk”. Gay’s got more upside than the players like Childress and R.Brewer. He’s also not so young or inexperienced that I would call him untapped.
The contract amount makes a big difference
In the early/mid McHale era, guys like Joe Smith, Chauncey, Malik came in for reasonable contracts as reclamation projects. Gay for 2-3 years at $5/6 million would be well worth a shot.
If the money is right, one thing to consider is that strong organizations are better positioned to get potential out of guys like this. I have early confidence that Rambis will be able to build a culture where we can plug guys like this in and tap into potential.
I don't know that he's worth more than $8 million per...
But at that price, he’s still tantalizing. One might have to accept limitations with him, though, like possibly not being a clutch scorer but more a guy who can put up points in bunches in the middle quarters (points are points though) and accept that the team would need other crunch-time guys (Jefferson would be one, Love would probably be a clutch shooter and Flynn would be a guy to constantly draw fouls). Also, at that price, if he didn’t pan out he might still be appealing to another team and the Wolves wouldn’t hamstring themselves too badly.
by pagingstanleyroberts on Oct 9, 2009 10:28 AM CDT reply actions
I'm flipping on this issue
Fortunately I don’t have the final vote:)
I like the possibility/potential of Gay, but I am leery of his current “mindset”. Could that change if he comes to MN with this staff? Yes, or he could become a cancer also. I would like to wait until this season starts and see what transpires here and in MEM and maybe something decent could be done
Timberwolves - NBA champs 2013!
(used with permission - Wolf in MO)
I doubt he'd ever become a cancer
He just seems like he could be a floater. That’s my only worry, is that if we got him he’d stay that way.
I mentioned this over in the other thread
The best way to get him from Memphis might be a sign and trade.
On the first day of free agency, we call Rudy and say “Whatever Memphis offers you, don’t take it unless it’s a sign and trade. We will pay you more.” Then we call Memphis and tell them “Hey, we think Gay could be the face of our franchise and are prepared to outbid you for him. You will lose him no matter what. However, if you want to make this work out better for both of us, we want you guys to sign and trade him to a reasonable deal, and in exchange we’ll give you (Brewer + Charlotte pick?) so that you’re not coming away from this empty-handed.”
Memphis' Opinion of Gay
I think we’re underestimating how their FO views Gay. I don’t recall the specific details, but the Suns were dangling Amare for Gay last season and Memphis passed. Hard to imagine they wouldn’t match a sub $10M per year offer for Gay.
Although having Randolph on the books for $17M next year and Marko for $7.6M could give them pause. And maybe they fall in love with Sam Young and believe he can fill the SF spot less expensively.
My guess is they look at Mayo/Gay as the future of that team and will be prepared to pay both of them serious coin.
Agreed
If they turned down Amare for Gay, there is no way they let him go. If he wants out he will have to play for the qualified offer and then leave in 2011. If the wolves don’t use their cap space next offseason they should have enough to get him then (if they want him).
by TheEvilProfessor on Oct 9, 2009 2:56 PM CDT up reply actions
Makes Sense
Why wouldn’t you trade a Overrated Small-Forward for an Overrated Power-Forward?
Although
You have to account for Heisley’s normal lack of willingness to spend for a player. If Amare was makingover 13M more per season than Gay, he may have just cringed away from the $ side of it.
But Gay and Mayo are the two best long term prospects on that team. I have trouble seeing them willing to part with Gay for anything reasonable, which is all I would be willing to part with.
by TheEvilProfessor on Oct 9, 2009 2:59 PM CDT up reply actions
It's hard to see a scenario where landing Gay makes financial success.
I’m not opposed to Rudy Gay. It’s just that I don’t see a way to get him here via good asset allocation. As others have written, it’s hard to see Memphis not matching a deal that isn’t “overpaying.” Sign and trade scenarios also burn through assets as we’d be paying Gay and giving up something else of nice value.
Further, more info will be gained on Gay this year. If he does well, Memphis is less likely to let him go. If he struggles again, we’re trying to acquire a player who has struggled 2 years in a row and has failed to utilize his immense gifts at a time when he should be improving quite a bit.
Rudy Gay...
could be a great 5th option starter on a championship level team – a la Ron Harper. He just needs to learn how to:
1. sacrifice his individual game for the good of the team
2. give effort to playing defense and work to become a lock down defender
3. offensively take the open shot, but realize he is best suited being a finisher and shot taker rather than an offensive focal point
If we talk to him and he is interested in doing these things for the Wolves, then I am interested in signing him to a deal around the MLE. If he balks at any of these, I am not interested in touching him.
Comments For This Post Are Closed
Secondary Sidebar
User Tools
Related FanPosts on Canis Hoopus
FanPosts
Community blog posts and discussion.
Certain photos copyright © 2012 by Associated Press or Getty Images. Any commercial use or distribution without the express written consent of Associated Press and Getty Images is strictly prohibited.
