Random shots while continuing the community draft board
OK, change of plans. Instead of rolling out a post about possible draft-day trades (Memphis, OKC, and Washington), I thought it would be a good idea to run a post about some items that don't really fit into our final draft board post and the draft day open thread. With no further delay or set-up, here they are:
- Ty Lawson will end up being one of the top 6 players in this draft. The Wolves obviously will have to take into account value and relative draft position, but I continue to be amazed how Lawson has slipped behind players like Jonny Flynn, Jrue Holiday, and even Eric Maynor in a few mock drafts. Lawson is the proud owner of the best ORtg in college ball as well as posting a 66 TS%, 47 3p%, 56 2p%, 8.19 ppr, 61 FTRate, and a 3.48 a/to ratio with excellent quickness and strength for his position. He is a good weak side defender who collects a nice number of steals per 40 minutes of action (2.63) while controlling the pace of the game with expert ball-handling and distribution skills. We have consistently rated Lawson as one of the top 3 guards in the draft as well as being the top-rated pure point of the 2009 class. I'm not saying the Wolves should take Lawson straight-up with the 6th pick, but I'm not saying it would be a bad thing either.
- Stephen Curry is the 2nd best player in this draft. This one got some steam when Blake Griffin told the world that he believes Curry is Numero Dos next to his Top Dog, but we have rated Curry as the 2nd best player for a long time. Curry is going to be an amazing ball-dominant scoring point guard in the NBA. He will not be faced with the double and triple teams he saw at Davidson and the NBA's perimeter defensive rules will allow his hesitation-based pick and roll game to become an influential player---operating as a sort of inverted Tony Parker by making a living off of mid-range pick and roll jumpers and threes (as opposed to Parkers mid-range pick and roll jumpers and layups). If Curry is on the board at #6, you take him and don't let go.
- Tyreke Evans is going to be an inefficient, ball-dominant volume scorer. We have gone back and forth and back and forth on Evans for a while now. On one hand, he has amazing height, length, and strength for either back court spot and he has the potential to be a physically dominant player. On the other hand, his shot is epically awful. Here's what we wrote about him back in April: "The big problem here is that Evans takes a large chunk of jump shots (40% of his shots are jumpers according to this DX post) and he makes less than 30% of them. What this means is that he can't score when he's not in transition or penetrating the lane. This was abundantly clear in Memphis' year-ending loss to Missouri. Evans made only 2 jumpers in the game and his outside game was so non-existent that Missouri was able to survive with him going nuts in the paint. It's not just that he can't make threes. Tony Parker has been a terrible three point shooter while making a living in transition and the paint. He also has a mid-range game that, at the very least, has to be respected. Evans simply can't make jump shots. I can't think of a single successful NBA perimeter player who makes a living in the paint and at the line while not being able to shoot a jumper over 30%. That's sub-Bassy territory." Is Bassy-with-size and (hopefully) finishing ability worth it? Can he run an offense as effectively as Bassy? If you draft Evans, you get a player who will need the ball in his hands a large amount of time with no guarantee of being able to run an offense. He has the potential to defend at a high level but that jump shot is a scary, scary thing indeed.
- I have no idea what in the world is going on with Jonny Flynn and Jrue Holiday. Why? We had these players ranked as the 11th and 16th best college guards at the end of the season. I can sort of see the argument for Holiday (solid defensive potential, size, good 2p%, intangibles) but with Flynn...beyond the excellent athleticism and apparent leadership abilities, he likely wasn't even the best guard on his own team (see Harris, Paul).
- Tyler Hansbrough or DeJuan Blair should 100%, absolutely, in no way, shape, or form be passed up if they are available at 18 (and provided someone like Lawson isn't still on the board). Our 3 top-rated non-Griffin bigs are, in order, Hasheem Thabeet, Blair, and Hansbrough. Both Blair and Hansbrough represent significant upgrades over Craig Smith and would give the Wolves a very capable big man backup. If forced to pick between the two, you go with Hansbrough. His size and athleticism are legit and you know he will bring it 100% each and every single night. The guy is a winner and it would be a very nice thing to see the Wolves finally pick up a hustling, bench-playing white power forward who a) can actually play, b) has talent, and c) hasn't thrown a professional basketball game by jacking up 7 three pointers in an attempt to secure a draft position. End the Mad Dog madness with Psycho T!!!
- Staying put at 6 will leave the Wolves in a better situation going forward than using assets to move up to #2. If the Wolves can find a way to turn their extraneous assets into an additional pick while keeping their own, fine. If they turn Mike Miller, Randy Foye, and the 18th and 6th picks into the 2nd pick, not so much. Stephen Curry or Tyreke Evans + Miller, Foye, and the 18th pick > Ricky Rubio and I don't think it's close.
- If the Wolves trade for the Washington pick, they may as well just keep it and draft at #5 and #6. Call Memphis' bluff. Chris Wallace will have to go to a completely new level of insane if he picks Rubio. If he does and Rubio stays in Europe, he loses all trade leverage. He has to know other people suspect this so drafting him in the first place makes very little sense. Thabeet is only modestly more attractive because while he likely doesn't want to play there, he would likely show up. If they want Evans, they can't bargain with Sacramento for Rubio because Sacramento seems to be content with drafting Evans or Rubio. In other words, unless Memphis has a jones for Jordan Hill or Jonny Flynn, pick 5 will likely do nothing for them because if the Wolves use it to get Rubio, Sacramento will likely take Evans and Memphis doesn't get the guy it wants even though it traded down. They'd be better off simply taking Evans at 2. Long story longer, the Washington pick sounds nice in a deal with Memphis but its functional value is probably pretty low compared to the outcome of the Wolves simply using the pick on their own. Griffin, Evans, Thabeet, and Rubio probably come off the board, leaving the Wolves with their pick between two of the following: Curry, Harden, DeRozan, Flynn, Holiday, whoever.
- The Wolves will have an opportunity to draft a solid player at 28 and 45 and should hold on to both picks. Just like last year (Mario Chalmers), the Wolves will find themselves in a position to draft a player that will be able to contribute as a solid role player. This year we think they will have a shot at 2 of the following players: Nick Calathes, Paul Harris, Jerel McNeal, Jack McClinton, Victor Claver, Sergio Llull, or Nando de Colo.
- UPDATE: If the Wolves want to swing for the fences with a young EL point guard, they should just sit at 6 and take Brandon Jennings. This one came up in the comments and I thought it would be a nice above-the-fold topic. Both Jennings and Rubio have big-time boom/bust potential but for different reasons. Jennings is blessed with what would probably be the best athleticism and quickness at his position the moment he steps on an NBA court. He has tremendous court vision and he can also score. On the other hand, he doesn't shoot well, he isn't all that strong, and there have been questions about his maturity. Rubio was on the Spanish Olympic team and he has the best assist numbers in the EL. He is also an oft-injured 18 year old point with a poor jumper, no strength, average (at best) athleticism and no experience playing an NBA-style game. Both players will likely take 2-3 years to become acclimated to the league. Both players have significant flaws. Both players have amazing ceilings. Both are YouTube heroes. One will likely go at the #2 spot in the draft while the other will be available at 6. My personal opinion is that Jennings has the physical tools to become a better NBA player and that he will cost significantly less than Rubio. His bust-level is Bassy but he would bust without selling the farm to get him while Rubio's bust level is Jason Williams or Rafer Alston and...well, he's going to come at a cost.
That's probably enough items to start up a decent pre-draft discussion. What unconventional opinions do you have about the draft? Throw them out in the comment section. While you're thinking about that, here's where our Community Draft Board currently stands:
- Blake Griffin
- Ricky Rubio
- James Harden
- Stephen Curry
- Hasheem Thabeet
- Tyreke Evans
- Demar DeRozan
- Brandon Jennings
- Jrue Holiday
- Jonny Flynn
- Jordan Hill
- Ty Lawson
- Earl Clark
- Eric Maynor
- Austin Daye
- ???
Until later.
0 recs |
139 comments
|
Comments
Good post
I’m not sure on Lawson—on the one hand, this is probably going to be a mediocre draft, down the road, and Top 6 might not be a very hard group to end up in. But, I also think there’s chance that he falls out of the Top 6 of just the point guards, with Rubio/Jennings/Curry/Holiday/Flynn/Maynor all being rated ahead of him by different websites. He was great at Carolina, but it remains to be seen if and how that carries over to the NBA. It sort of did for Ray Felton, but not to the point that he’s a big impact player.
Here’s one thing that I am beginning to think is an obvious point: If Kahn trades for the #2, and has to give up #6 in the process, he’s taking Rubio. If he trades up to #2, without giving up #6 (presumably trading Love, since no other assets other than Jefferson would get this done) I think he takes Thabeet and Curry. There’s just not a lot of sense, value-wise, to trade Love away for #2, and then take Rubio and whatever else is left at #6 that isn’t a point guard. We’d essentially be swapping Love for Jordan Hill or something, while taking Rubio instead of Curry/Jennings/etc. Trading up for Rubio is safer than trading Love away for Thabeet/Curry. The latter option, however, gives us a higher ceiling, if both Curry and Thabeet becomes the impact players that their biggest fans think they will.
Either way, I expect one of those things to happen. I don’t see us staying put at 6 & 18, and just walking away with Curry and Mullens/Daye/someone like that.
by Andy G on Jun 23, 2009 6:17 AM CDT reply actions 0 recs
Thanks...
…and agreed on the Love swap thing. I think it’s overlooked just how much better Love would be with Rubio than Jefferson. Anybody can pass the ball to the left block and getting Rubio for this task would be the equivalent of getting a Ferrari to drive to the supermarket. They’d be much better off getting Evans (yes, even with the jumper issues) or whoever was there at 6. Thabeet/Curry is interesting. I really like Love and I think they’d be making a huge mistake by moving him, but that is interesting. It would definitely be the big test of the “Al needs to move back to his natural position” argument.
The World's Leading Exporter of Small Area Quickness
www.canishoopus.com
by Stop-n-Pop on Jun 23, 2009 7:45 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
The obvious problem with Rubio and Jefferson...
is that Rubio seems to thrive in the open court, and Jefferson thrives in the half-court. Though that might be a little bit more of a problem in theory than in how it would play out. There are fast players on the Wolves (Foye and Brewer) that are noticeably better in the full-court game, so it might just make us a more versatile offensive team to have a running, playmaking point, along with a dominant half-court scorer.
The bigger concern for this group, going forward, is the defensive end of the court. Prior to Jefferson’s injury, I thought it was becoming clear that we were an ok offensive team, at worst, but were getting punished, on a pretty consistent basis, by good scorers in the 4th Quarter. The most exciting games (early game vs SAS, for one) involved great scoring exchanges between Jefferson and an opposing star, like Parker, or even OJ Mayo in that early one where Jeff scored 40 in an OT win. A couple other close 4th Quarters that stick out were against Detroit, when Sheed killed us down the stretch, and Toronto, when JO (before the trade) had a great 2nd half against our smallball team.
That’s why I would welcome Thabeet. He gets bashed by a lot of posters, here, but all reports suggest that he’ll be valued as a Top-3 prospect by the pros. If we were able to add both he and a good guard like Curry, the net gain in overally quality might be better than if we load up on offensive excitement at the expense of half-court defense. When the game gets close, it slows down, and you need great rotations, but more importantly, you need guys capable of stopping the best scorers in the world. We don’t have that, right now.
Anyway, I’ll be surprised if Kahn doesn’t make a move to get either #2 or separate lottery picks. Another option would be, if Harden falls to 6, take him, and then take a PG that slips at 18, or trade up a little higher than that. Maybe we could get Lawson, Maynor or even Holiday. That’d be a safe route that keeps Foye/Brewer/Love/Jefferson as young pieces going forward. It’s just not the “splash” that we seem to expect from The Kahn Man.
by Andy G on Jun 23, 2009 8:04 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
I was reminded of the gratuitous level of GM draft bluffing and jawboning by an article in the NYT yesterday. Bottom line, if the Wolves really wanted Rubio badly, they would probably be a lot more discreet about it. The flip side of this, that may please a few people here, is that they’ve been notably quiet about Curry.
I agree with you S+P, it makes little sense to move up to #2. But, I would love to see them snag the #5, and I am pretty ok with them dumping anybody but Love to accomplish it.
by DougW on Jun 23, 2009 6:27 AM CDT reply actions 0 recs
Is there a chance that.....
Harden falls into our laps at 6? Griffen, Thabeet, Rubio, Evans, Curry…….
Perhaps the clever thing is use pick 6.
by Auswolf on Jun 23, 2009 7:08 AM CDT reply actions 0 recs
There is...
…but I don’t think it’s good. I think he gets no further than Washington if he slips.
The World's Leading Exporter of Small Area Quickness
www.canishoopus.com
by Stop-n-Pop on Jun 23, 2009 7:45 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
On Rubio
I read somewhere yesterday that he has to go in the top 3, otherwise the rookie salary constraints won’t provide enough funds to pay his spanish club his buyout. Not sure if that’s true (or if it even makes sense), but if it is, obviously if you want Rubio, then you have to move in the top 3.
by Sterno on Jun 23, 2009 7:16 AM CDT reply actions 0 recs
Buyout reduction
Their are reports that the arbitrator in his buyout case is going to reduce his $6.6 mil buyout. If his buyout is reduced this would pretty much guarantee that he comes over next year. One big thing about him is that while it would beneficial for him to play in a big market, it is even more essential that he gets on a team that will allow him to be the #1 PG from day 1. He will still get endorsements in Spain if he is riding the bench it but if he plays a lot (and really well) his rookie year, that number could grow a ton. That’s why I think his camp is warming up to Minny. IMO, his ideal situation is for Memphis to take him #2 then trade him to either Sacramento or here, then to start on opening day and have a solid rookie campaign (All-Rookie 1st/2nd team). Now, obviously NY would be a dream scenario but it sounds like they just don’t have the pieces to move all the way up to get him.
by jballer_13 on Jun 23, 2009 8:21 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Great points
also, don’t discount a little Joe Smithian implied contract extension as soon as the kid proves he can play.
by PoorDick on Jun 23, 2009 9:06 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
False dilemma, though
“Stephen Curry or Tyreke Evans + Miller, Foye, and the 18th pick > Ricky Rubio and I don’t think it’s close.”
That list of assets might be too much to give up for Rubio — but there isn’t any question that you’d rather have an All Star than a bunch of half-formed Ryan Gomes sort of players. The Wolves should be trying to move up for Rubio if they’ve identified him as a premier point guard. Charles Barkley is worth more than Andrew Lang, Jeff Hornacek, and Tim Perry.
Sometimes you boil down the talent.
by feral on Jun 23, 2009 7:21 AM CDT reply actions 0 recs
That is..
….if you think Rubio is an All Star level player. Even if he pans out to his high end, he’s probably not there for 2-3 more years and you give up your two most useful expiring contracts in a year where they’ll probably be put to good use for one of the biggest risks in the draft. I’m more of the opinion that he’s not going to be significantly better than some of the other points in this draft. I think Curry will be a much better pro straight up. Rubio is an often-injured 18 year old EL point guard with a questionable jumper, average (at best) athleticism, and no history of playing NBA-style ball. He does have amazing assist numbers in the EL and his work for the Spanish national team is hard to overlook but I think it’s wrong to pencil him in at an All Star level. He has the biggest boom/bust potential in this draft aside from Brandon Jennings and do you take a crack at him with the #2 pick and all of those assets or do you sit pat and take the good player you know will be there at 6? If they want to gamble, I’m pretty sure Jennings will be there at 6. Say, that’s a good one to put above the fold.
The World's Leading Exporter of Small Area Quickness
www.canishoopus.com
by Stop-n-Pop on Jun 23, 2009 7:41 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Good points. But, I think that I would be willing to wait...
… two or three years for a draft pick to become an All-Star in most scenarios, and especially in our current 24-win scenario. Two All-Stars (if we keep Al) makes puts us one solid piece short of title contention, I would think, and that piece might even be Love. I am very intrigued by Curry, as well, and the numbers point to his success in a league less prone to mob defense, and I share your semi-man crush. I do, however, think that Rubio is probably going to be the better perimeter defender of the two (we always tout his passing but overlook the defensive player of the year awards) and better perimeter D is essential with a Al-Love rearguard. Curry, while I think he will become a solid starter or one of the great 6th men in the NBA (18ppg. type guy— I think his game sets up perfectly for this), might lock us into a scenario where we are undersized at four positions (Al, Love, Foye, Curry). Do you think Rubio has less defensive potential than Curry? Maybe we should talk more about that side of the court when weighing these two dudes against each other.
by TheH on Jun 23, 2009 9:06 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
I think Foye...
…is as good as gone and that the size thing won’t be as big of a deal with him out of the picture. You could probably get away with starting a guy like Brewer at the 2 next to Curry for a year or until you can upgrade the 2. I don’t know enough about Rubio’s man defense to say how good he’ll be in the NBA. I know he’s a fantastic off-the-ball defender but it remains to see how much of a man defender he’ll be. I guess my ultimate point here is that I don’t think Rubio is an All Star type performer and that if you want to take a risk on someone you do so with Jennings. Unless they can get him sort of on the cheap, I just think they give up far too much for a very unsure thing. I can’t think of a riskier #2 pick….especially in a deep PG draft.
The World's Leading Exporter of Small Area Quickness
www.canishoopus.com
by Stop-n-Pop on Jun 23, 2009 9:33 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Rubio
Jim Boehiem doesn’t think that much of Rubio in today’s SNT and isn’t sure his game will translate well into the NBA. Is that a small voice in the wilderness?? Or is he indirectly stumping his own guys?
Sometimes the obvious is hidden.
by frankenhoops on Jun 23, 2009 10:12 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Classic college coach reaction
Dick Vitale goes on this rant every draft day, complaining that the college guys will do better and that the NBA is too enamoured of foreign players. They want to retain their power and they want to stump for their guys.
I think it’s silly. I don’t know exactly how to measure this, but there are great players all over the world. At this point, foreign players are well established in the NBA, both as rotational, useful role guys (Kirilenko, Varajao, etc.) and stars (Nowitzki, Yao, Parker).
You have to judge them on their merits—it isn’t a negative that Rubio has been playing in the 2nd best league in the world. Maybe he won’t be all that, but just because he’s not from the corrupt NCAA pipeline isn’t a reason.
by Eric in Madison on Jun 23, 2009 10:46 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
If Johnny Flynn...
isn’t in this draft he would never say that. He was 100% stumping.
by Pants_ on Jun 23, 2009 3:21 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
I agree on Rubio. He is too big of a gamble to throw all our assets at. Especially if there is a chance that we can get the #5 (and keep the #6) by offering less. Pretty passes only get you so far..beyond that the guy is projecting to be a poor shooter and defensive liability.
He’s just does not seem to be obviously better than the rest of the #2-10 prospects. If we want to draft high risk/high reward type players doesn’t it make more sense to have more picks?
by DougW on Jun 23, 2009 7:53 AM CDT reply actions 0 recs
Who's projecting Rubio as a defensive problem?
He’s certainly a better defensive option than anyone else the Wolves have on their roster. He’s been an above-par European defender, even with his injured hand in the olympic games. His age makes him slight, but he’s not Corey Brewer’s legs slight, and filling out a bit seems natural.
Next to guys like Flynn — widely seen as a very good defensive PG for his size — Rubio is basically not giving up much as a defensive prospect. He draws comparisons to Jason Kidd precisely because of passing and defense being his perceived strengths.
by feral on Jun 23, 2009 4:01 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
He's been..
…good off-the-ball in zone or transition situations. He will have to play a lot more man in the NBA.
The World's Leading Exporter of Small Area Quickness
www.canishoopus.com
by Stop-n-Pop on Jun 23, 2009 4:07 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Here's where I wish I had the time...
…to complete my Calathes = American Rubio post. ;)
The World's Leading Exporter of Small Area Quickness
www.canishoopus.com
by Stop-n-Pop on Jun 23, 2009 4:25 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
That's such an unfair comparison
Calathes is a way better shooter…
by Ebomb on Jun 23, 2009 5:40 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
I think the scenario that makes the most sense at this point is to make a hard play for #5 and keep both #5 & #6, taking whoever falls to us. Memphis seems to have no idea what is going on with #2 so I would rather let them make the pick and then we could make a decision on trading with them. They can’t draft Rubio, if Chris Wallace does this there is a good chance he gets canned. If Rubio refuses to play for them and goes back to Spain or demands a trade where Memphis gets less value in return, that could be the last straw, especially after the Lakers won the championship b/c of Wallace’s charity.
If they take Evans, then Sacramento probably takes Rubio and I could definitely live with Curry/Thabeet or preferably Curry/Harden (depending on OKC). If they take Thabeet, we would pretty much be guaranteed either Rubio or Evans falls to #5. If Memphis messes up and takes Rubio and everyone in Madison Square Garden laughs as Rubio has to fake a smile while holding a Grizz jersey, then I say we look into trading for Rubio. It just doesn’t make sense to bail out Memphis right now and let them trade out of #2 while getting maximum value in return.
by jballer_13 on Jun 23, 2009 8:12 AM CDT reply actions 0 recs
The StarTribune is reporting...
That the Wolves are trying to talk to Rubio and Thabeet prior to the draft.
Saying hello to Ricky and Hasheem…?
Posted on June 22nd, 2009 – 5:50 PM
By Jerry Zgoda
The Wolves are working today to set up at least meetings or interviews with Ricky Rubio and Hasheem Thabeet as they continue to explore options for Thursday’s draft.
Sounds like the Wolves are next on Rubio’s list of teams to talk to after he leaves a workout in Sacramento this afternoon. Not sure if that means in person or not.
David Kahn has been doing more background checks on Thabeet as well and earlier today was trying to set up something with agent Bill Duffy but they were playing phone tag.
Anything could still happen between now and Thursday. Heck, anything could happen on Thursday night. After Blake Griffin goes first to the Clippers, this could be the most unpredictable draft in years.
If the Wolves somehow could get that second pick from Memphis, not sure which guy they’d prefer. The national buzz is for Rubio, but I’ll lean toward the big fella.
Rubio would give them the dynamic playmaker who will sell tickets and perhaps that trumps everything, but Thabeet would be a pretty formidable bookend to place next to Al Jefferson.
Heck, as high as David Kahn apparently is aiming, maybe he’ll try to get both of ‘em…
Both players are in California for one more day and then will head to New York City for an arrival there Wednesday to do media stuff for Thursday’s big night.
Kahn said both players’ representatives have asked him not to disclose the team’s plans for meeting with each guy. When I just texted him, Kahn said he is still in town, but Minneapolis is on the way from California to New York, so it’s possible one or both guys could stop here on their way East.
They also could do something by phone just to make themselves feel better.
Now I’m wondering if there’s a chance that Rubio could fall to the Wolves at No. 6 without them having to move up to get him. He’ll likely have worked out some kind of compromise on that buyout with his Spanish team by Thursday night.
Talked to original Timberwolf Scott Roth today for a story I’ll write for Thursday’s paper that will focus on Rubio and Thabeet as the guys who will determine how this draft falls. He has been hired for the past month to work out Thabeet in preparation for the draft.
Roth helped develop Pau Gasol and Shane Battier when he was at Memphis. In a nutshell, here’s what he said:
Doesn’t worry that he’ll be an NBA bust. Says it’s exactly the opposite and calls him one of the few guys in the draft with a legitimate high upside.
Can get much stronger, never really did any core strengthening until trainers got ahold of him here in pre-draft workouts. Has more of an offensive game than people think, can shoot it to 16-17 feet and can be a pick and pop guy in the pros.
Says the advantage he has is most rookies struggle defensively when they enter the league, but he believes Thabeet will be a shot-blocking presence immediately.
Thinks he’ll be a better offensive player than Dikembe Mutombo, to whom Thabeet is often compared, but not as dominant defensively as the big finger wagger.
by mnjayhawk on Jun 23, 2009 8:12 AM CDT reply actions 0 recs
Duffy!!!
I wonder if he’ll be mad at Kahn for firing his old college roommate.
The World's Leading Exporter of Small Area Quickness
www.canishoopus.com
by Stop-n-Pop on Jun 23, 2009 8:14 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
I was really surprised by his take on Thabeet.
I do like that he puts his defense in perspective. We’ll see about the offense.
by Kevin Loves McHale's Navy on Jun 23, 2009 8:36 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
That's a little-recognized sidelight to McHale being gone
I forget where I was looking at a list of potential draftees and their agents…. Sorting the list one or two different ways, it suddenly hit me: We don’t have to fret that McHale will automatically favor Bill Duffy’s clients, now.
by feral on Jun 23, 2009 3:56 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Ty Hanosaurus Rex
… greatly appreciates your willingness to take him at 18.

by Kevin Loves McHale's Navy on Jun 23, 2009 8:39 AM CDT reply actions 0 recs
His wide-eyed, gape-mouthed visage
won’t be for the TWolves, because in a wildly uncertain draft, he looks as predictable as you can get (even if the upside is limited). He’ll go mid-teens to some contender.
by PoorDick on Jun 23, 2009 9:16 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
SnP stole my random thought
That Jennings may be the pick at #6. Supposedly the Wolves have a decent scout in Europe these days, and if that’s the case, what better way to prove his “worth” than to take one of the european guys.
While I like Curry, harden and maybe evans better, I think going to Europe will have benefitted Jennings. And I certainly hope that the folks in TC are evaluating the entire body of a player’s work, not just the “PG showdown” they had last week. Making a decision on one workout is asinine.
by Sterno on Jun 23, 2009 8:41 AM CDT reply actions 0 recs
What kind of basketball do you want to watch?
I’m finding myself increasingly asking about the viewability of the games from last year and the overall aesthetic qualities I enjoy in a basketball game. Hyper-athletic, ball dominant volume scorers might put up stats, but they friggin’ suck to watch. Plain and simple, I enjoy watching smart basketball, and as such am absolutely praying we come out of this draft with Rubio, Harden, or Curry. Elevating a team’s BB IQ can be as rewarding as elevating its length and athleticism.
by TheH on Jun 23, 2009 9:10 AM CDT reply actions 0 recs
agreed..
….i want a team of high b-ball iq efficient players. they won’t ever win it all without lucking into a superstar so they may as well make it fun.
The World's Leading Exporter of Small Area Quickness
www.canishoopus.com
by Stop-n-Pop on Jun 23, 2009 9:34 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
True...
But when possible, they should be combined. I’d also add toughness, skill, and effort as important. I don’t know if I’m leaving something out, but those are all integral. Jordan had all of these, and the good teams have guys in their rotation who have at least 3 or 4 of those traits.
by pagingstanleyroberts on Jun 23, 2009 12:02 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Points that are assumed by this excellent post
and good comments are that the expiring contracts are going to be used by the Wolves to trade for some player with a longer contract, and then pay that player over the contract.
I would like that scenario to be true, but I have no proof that that is the case (except the rumors of Miller to the Clippers for a big man). My guess on why Kahn may be generally be after more high draft picks instead of older, better, more expensive players is that:
a. It sells “hope” to the fans, yet also requires them to be reasonably patient since they’re evaluating players who are in their late teens or early 20s.
b. It’s much cheaper to pay the 2nd pick $3.7 million per year, than it is to sign, say, Ramon Sessions for the MLE.
c. The rookie contract is tilted in the team’s favor (i.e. all the “Team Option” years can be voided if the player doesn’t work out), but any older player is likely to have a fully-guaranteed contract.
d. We kind of know who Ramon Sessions or Marvin Williams is. But the more high picks the Wolves get, the more chances they have at lucking out with a superstar.
As to Rubio being fruh-JEE-lay, anyone concerned with that must not know many 6’4" 18 year olds. They’re string beans. Especially ones who are playing a sport and position at a very high level, that requires constant motion, and full-court sprinting. I haven’t seen any pictures of John Stockton in high school, but I’m guessing he wasn’t exactly Oliver Miller, either.
by PoorDick on Jun 23, 2009 9:32 AM CDT reply actions 0 recs
String (Bean) Theory
It will be interesting to see if he can fill out or if he has the body type of a high school cross country nerd…like my entire family was at that age.
The World's Leading Exporter of Small Area Quickness
www.canishoopus.com
by Stop-n-Pop on Jun 23, 2009 9:36 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
With his body of work...
… I still can’t believe he’s only eighteen.
by TheH on Jun 23, 2009 10:15 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
The main issue with Lawson is size
Seriously, he’s a touch over 5’11". Tony Parker, who I consider to be small for the NBA, has 2-3 inches on the lad. The Wolves already have the same sized player in Telfair, I’d be looking for someone with size at PG .
Is it too late to start a “Baron Davis” for PG campaign? The Clippers apparently want to unload him too. Possible trade scenarios include Miller/Telfair and Cardinal/Foye/Telfair.
With Davis on board you have a “Championship Level” PG for 3-4 years, room to draft the rookie PG of your choice now for backup.
by levi_mn on Jun 23, 2009 10:24 AM CDT reply actions 0 recs
Just say no to Baron
Trading for him would only rob of us assets (the robber Baron), shooting down our ability to get better over the long term for a short term gain (the red, I mean, Cap Baron).
The two points I am most intrigued by are Lawson and Curry. I still think Curry is worth a higher pick than 6 if we move up to get him. SnP’s description of his stop and pop game reminded me of how devastating Sam Cassell was with his jumper. If Curry can do that, then we should get him bar none.
Lawson, on the other hand, strikes me as a guy who’s going to play in the league for a long, long time, sometimes as a starter and sometimes as the second half starter on a good/playoff team. Maybe he’ll buck the odds for a small guy like Allen Iverson did, but I predict he’ll be this year’s Kevin Love—his production as a rookie next year will surpass the predictions based on his physical traits. If we do a trade and end up picking 8-10, I wouldn’t be surprised by a Lawson choice. I just think that at 6 it’s too high.
"Come on Eddie, let's get serious."
by biggity2bit on Jun 23, 2009 10:33 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
No Baron. Not the attitude we need.
by BLayne23 on Jun 23, 2009 10:46 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
I like Baron...
But he needs to play in a dribble-drive/PnR system to be effective. If he’s not in those, he just shoots threes, which he isn’t that good at. Plus, he’s a #2 guy on a great team who thinks he’s a #1, and he’s injury-prone.
by pagingstanleyroberts on Jun 23, 2009 12:05 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
But
He does grow a sweet beard, which should be factored into any decision.
"Come on Eddie, let's get serious."
by biggity2bit on Jun 23, 2009 12:16 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Yes
I also like the beard-without-headband look.
by pagingstanleyroberts on Jun 23, 2009 12:25 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Attitude? Who knows?
He’s reportedly a solid citizen – off the court.
In New Orleans, I guess it was issues with the coach, Byron Scott that began this “bad attitude” rep.
In L.A., he got screwed by Elton Brand’s promises to resign with the Clippers. A couple of injuries and the Clippers were back to their familiar role as no-hopers. And he didn’t play too hard after that. until late in the season. But I think the Clippers looking to trade him has as much to do with salary as attitude.
And maybe you’re right — would he want to be back into a crappy “expansion team” situation? Jefferson isn’t Elton Brand, in fact we don’t really know how Al is going to perform following surgery. Would Baron give 100%? I don’t know, but if he did, it’d be a big upgrade at PG for the Wolves over anyone they’re going to get in the draft (barring Rubio going All-Star instead of bust).
And as I said, give a rookie time to learn.
by levi_mn on Jun 23, 2009 12:58 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Prose and Kahn's
With 3 firsts and two seconds in ’09, probably 2 firsts and a second in ’10, a Euro stashed, and expiring contracts, Kahn has numerous, valuable assets to shape this team and make his mark. I hope he is sharp and his temperament is cold, calculated, and Machiavellian rather than slick, look-at-me, wheeling and dealing. He has a small but interesting window to be brilliant or a putz.
by Elastico on Jun 23, 2009 10:44 AM CDT reply actions 0 recs
I Kahncur
Hopefully he’ll be more the executive than the former player turned exec we are used to.
PS – Like the puns :)
Sometimes the obvious is hidden.
by frankenhoops on Jun 23, 2009 11:05 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
I think most of the Wolves' problems
are Taylor-made, along with the contracts given to a KG veteran.
Not to be Flip about it . . .
by PoorDick on Jun 23, 2009 2:30 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Couldn't agree more with this post.
The price to move up is too high, and you’re only going to be able to move to #4, unless you give up the fam to go to #2. Different sport, but ask Mike Ditka how much it can hurt when you put all your valuable eggs into one player.
Stay at 6, draft a PG – be it Curry, Lawson or Jennings, depending on who’s available. Trade the 18th pick and a player or two to bring back a vets and move up if at all possible. If not, then continue to draft well with an eye toward potentially using that player in a future deal. Or, if you draft well, be happy with the guy you get.
If you ask me, Hansbrough would be a great addition to this team. They need someone willing to bust their ass day in and day out off that bench.
And I still hold to my belief that Hasheem Thabeet has more of a chance at becoming the next Shawn Bradley than the next Dikembe Mutombo. Let Wallace hang himself with that pick at #2.
by BLayne23 on Jun 23, 2009 10:46 AM CDT reply actions 0 recs
Flynn - Lawson; Evans ; Jennings
Based on what I saw Friday, I’d take Flynn at 6. Over Lawson, over Evans and DEFINITELY over Jennings.
First, let’s get Jennings out of the equation. What a disappointment. His shot is a knuckle ball – no rotation. His form stinks. His attitude seemed horrible. Show boating in a workout? Yuck. His speed got him here. He’s pissing his rep down the toilet. Speed, flashes of greatness were the plusses. No thanks.
Evans was a joy to watch when he wasn’t shooting the ball. LeBron-esque to the hoop agaiinst smaller guys. Very solid D in 1 on 1 drill and 3 on 3. His outside shot is a huge achilles heel and he doesn’t feel enough like a PG.
Lawson and Flynn have similarities. Pretty high ceilings with a high degree of “reliability”. Flynn absolutely won me over with his intense D and athleticism to go on top of his PG as QB nature. Nice outside shot. Handled Evans as well as anybody in the one on one.
by A.K. Agikamik on Jun 23, 2009 10:48 AM CDT reply actions 0 recs
Your thoughts....
…on Jennings are in line with what I’ve heard the most from the workout and that kind of makes me wonder about the report listed at True Hoop:
As I mentioned, I went into the day hoping to see brilliance from Brandon Jennings and instead witnessed the type of raw, inconsistent play that many scouts and coaches have been ranting about. First off, the rumors about his foot speed are true. He was easily a full step (maybe half-step over Flynn …) quicker than anyone in the gym. I’d love to hand him and Derrick Rose each a ball and watch them race up and down the court all day.
The drills were not kind to young Jennings. He missed a lot of shots and drew scorn from the assistant coaches when he repeatedly ignored direction — often choosing to make the move he wanted to make as opposed to the one they were asking to see. In one-on-one he improved a bit but was continually over-powered by Lawson and Flynn (Brandon is listed under 170lbs, and his lack of strength was obvious) and gambled far too frequently on defense.
I was nearly ready to write him off and admit that perhaps his critics had him pegged, a year or two at Arizona would’ve done him some good … and then they started scrimmaging. Three on three — more or less a twenty-minute fast break with those guys.
Suddenly Jennings remembered who he was and started moving with the type of swagger that I’d read about. On the first possession of the scrimmage he cleanly picked off a pass and beat Flynn in a footrace for an emphatic two-hander. A few possessions later he took an outlet from Holiday and sprinted down the left side. After beating Lawson with a stutter step, he picked up the ball and put it behind his back to avoid Evans’ help defense. Then he flicked a no-look over his shoulder to Jrue for the easy dunk.
Onlookers collectively gasped.
Two of the next four possessions ended with Jennings freezing his man and hitting 18-footers.
I’m not comfortable saying Jennings should be the player Minnesota takes sixth, especially if Evans is available (I’m seriously impressed). But I can’t think of a player in the draft with more upside than Brandon Jennings.
The guy has some serious upside and he’s still a teenager.
The World's Leading Exporter of Small Area Quickness
www.canishoopus.com
by Stop-n-Pop on Jun 23, 2009 11:22 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Where are you finding Jumper% for Evans?
Is there a site that gives percentage of made shots from different positions on the floor?
by KMils on Jun 23, 2009 11:00 AM CDT reply actions 0 recs
DX...
…ran a post on him a while back. It’s linked to above. You’ll have to scroll down the page at the link. Here’s part one:
Evans was the top player on our list in possessions used per game as a finisher at 8.8, and his PPP of 1.14 lands him a bit above average. Unfortunately, his overall PPP was .88, which lands him slightly below average and exposes the biggest weakness in his offensive game: his jump shot. His PPP in open catch and shoot situations was a paltry .86. Couple that with only .69 PPP on jump shots off the dribble, and it becomes abundantly obvious that Evans is far from a complete package offensively. His PPP of .54 on isolations is a bit disconcerting as well, but it shows that he’s opportunistic enough to find his way to the rim in other situations, while also displaying his tendency to force the issue in one on one opportunities. Getting fouled at an average rate and not being too turnover prone, whichever team drafts Evans needs to take the time to develop his jumper to help the transition of his dribble-drive game to the NBA.
and part two:
With his poor shooting mechanics (he fades away unnecessarily on every attempt) Evans is very streaky with his feet set in catch and shoot situations, and downright dreadful shooting the ball off the dribble. He only converts a dismal 25% of his jump-shots according to Synergy Sports Technology, but the problem is that he settles for them on a regular basis—they make up about 40% of his possessions, often with a hand in his face and early in the shot clock no less. While his skill-set may develop in time, Evans’ mentality looks extremely questionable—it’s hard not to come away with the impression that he’s a pretty selfish player. He’s likely going to have to revamp his shooting stroke entirely if he’s to ever become even a decent threat from the NBA 3-point line, something he’s been unwilling to do up until this point.
He’s missed 75% of his jumpers. Not just 3s, but jump all jumpers. This wouldn’t be so troubling if he didn’t rely on jump shots for 40% of his possessions.
The World's Leading Exporter of Small Area Quickness
www.canishoopus.com
by Stop-n-Pop on Jun 23, 2009 11:18 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Despite that . . .
both Hollinger and Ed Weiland’s draft raters lover him.
by Sulla on Jun 23, 2009 12:30 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Hollinger likes him...
…as a wing. Weiland factors in RSB40 as a leading factor while putting him at the shooting guard. Will he have the potential to be a big defender who can rebound, block, and steal balls? Yes, but…well, here’s hoping Hollinger and Weiland are right and I’m wrong if the Wolves get him. That shot is heinous and he wasn’t as good of a 1-on-1 scorer from iso situations as you’d like to see from a guy like that.
The World's Leading Exporter of Small Area Quickness
www.canishoopus.com
by Stop-n-Pop on Jun 23, 2009 12:52 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
I think my main issue with Evans is one of fit
If his game is dependent on ISO’s. How much room will he have with Al operating inside? As opposed to a floor-spacer like Curry? I actually think Larry Hughes is a terrific comparsion for Evans’ game. He’s a good enough ball-handler to play on the ball some, with the potential to be a solid defender with a questionable shot. Hughes in his younger days had very good rebounding numbers also.
by Jose Cordoba on Jun 23, 2009 12:57 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Thank you for some excellent morning reading once again
I really appreciated your site this offseason SNP. I get to watch a ton of College basketball and after the sonics left town, rarely get a chance to drive to Portland to see games at the Rose Garden, but I’ll be a TWolves fan for life. After posting at the STrib board last year, your site is a breath of fresh air with the reasoned posters, and daily updates. I appreciate your hard work giving me an outlet to talk BBall.
The boring draft to me is where we stay at 6 and take whoever falls between Rubio, Thabeet, Harden, Curry or Evans. Evans has a lot of questions, but I think, love him or loathe him, he will be the pick if he is all that is left.
It will be interesting to see how draft night unfolds, as with the rules that you can’t trade your own pick in consecutive years, trades for draft rights won’t occur until after the selection. The national media seems to be focused in on the Wolves trading up to grab Rubio at #2 while Zgoda and I believe you in a previous post seem to think that Thabeet is who the team is enamored with. I’m going to side with the locals and think it’s Thabeet. I think the Thunder have the biggest smoke screen going since they tried to trade for Chandler, a defense and rebounding big with absolutely no post game, and were willing to pay him big money to do that. They are going to draft Thabeet if he’s available. If not, I think they take Harden or trade the rights to Rubio.
The point of all this rambling is I think your point at #7 is off. I think if the Wolves trade up to #2 and take Thabeet, which they would disclose to Memphis, the Thunder are locked in on Harden or Curry and Rubio is a poor fit, leaving Rubio for Sacramento. In fact, if the Wolves were to promise Memphis that they wouldn’t select Evans with #5, Memphis would probably rather have #6 and the lesser salary obligation to that pick.
With so much muddle I can’t remember a draft with more smokescreens going on, and particularly at Sacramento. Sacramento’s roster is filled with players at 2-5, Martin, Noicioni, Thompson, and Hawes who need a shot creator to be effective. None of those guys are capable at creating their own shot. Rubio is the perfect fit. The minute they realized Memphis was interested in Evans and the Wolves were interested in trading up, David Kahn plugs Evans into the PG workout, and the Kings start making their angle. By feigning interest in Evans, and talking down Rubio to the national media, they can give Memphis pause about trading down, drive the price higher for Teams like the Wolves to acquire #2, and sit back and watch Rubio slide to #4 without having to give up Jason Thompson to move up. So the Kings immediately bring Evans into a PG workout in Sacramento and immediately leak to the press how amazing Evans was.
I think you can guarantee the following things in the top 4: (1) If Thabeet is on the board, the Thunder will take him; (2) If Thabeet is off the board, the Thunder take Harden or Curry; and (3) If Rubio is on the board, the Kings will take him. To Memphis, and if your interested in Curry and Evans, it means that you let the Wolves trade up to #2 for Thabeet, but you avoid allowing them to trade up for Rubio.
by Ebomb on Jun 23, 2009 11:18 AM CDT reply actions 0 recs
Thanks
It will definitely be interesting to see what happens once Memphis goes on the clock….although, I’m still holding out for the Clips to do something crazy. I think we may be underestimating Dunleavy.
The World's Leading Exporter of Small Area Quickness
www.canishoopus.com
by Stop-n-Pop on Jun 23, 2009 11:24 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
One thing about the Clips, though...
Sterling is a cheap SOB who realizes #1 picks sell tix. Griffin is a great marketing tool, and the Clips usually keep their #1s (Manning, ’Kandi).
by pagingstanleyroberts on Jun 23, 2009 12:13 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
It is sad to me that they have had that many #1’s while we have never had a top 2…
by Xand1 on Jun 23, 2009 12:39 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
I'm not a young man
but I’m also not old enough to have seen anything but old tapes of him. But you know who Rubio actually reminds me of?
Bob Cousy. That guy was nuts. He essentially helped invent the modern NBA. He was the first guy who brought that wide open style to the NBA—no-looks, behind the back, etc. People always think of Bill Russell when the think of the old Celtics teams, and deservedly so—they started winning titles when they got Russell. But even before that, they were like the Phoenix Suns of the 1950s.
If you go look at the stats, you can see it. The Celtics were always ahead of the curve. They led the league in scoring throughout the 50s, even before they got Russell. They were playing a faster game than everyone else, and it was because of Cousy. He wasn’t the most explosive guy, but he transitioned better than anyone, he passed better than anyone, he saw the court better than anyone.
he led the league in assists 8 straight years, and despite a relatively short career (12 years where they weren’t playing 82 games) he’s still 14th all-time in assists.
Those Celtics teams were ahead of their times. They dragged the league from the low-scoring early 50s to the historically high scoring early 60s (highest scoring era in NBA history). Russell was a vital piece of that, but so was Cousy.
I could see Rubio being a similar player. I think he’s worth the risk. I’d love to get him.
by Eric in Madison on Jun 23, 2009 11:20 AM CDT reply actions 0 recs
From CNN/SI rumors
About half of the teams in the league have spoken with the Wizards, according to a league source, and most of those discussions have revolved around their No. 5 draft pick. Some teams, though, have also asked about the availability of the Wizards’ top players, with most focusing on Caron Butler. Multiple sources have confirmed that the Wizards engaged in conversations with the Phoenix Suns about acquiring all-star forward Amare Stoudemire last month, but the talks stalled when the Suns demanded Butler. Another league source added that Golden State and Portland have also attempted to land Butler, but President Ernie Grunfeld hasn’t budged
I still think my Al Jefferson to WAS for Butler plus the #5 proposal is not so outlandish. We could sweeten the pot by throwing in Miller or Foye’s expiring contract and taking Etan Thomas.
by DougW on Jun 23, 2009 11:58 AM CDT reply actions 0 recs
Word
Apparently David Kahn wasn’t joking when he said he would be active on the phone lines. TimberwolvesPress has learned the Wolves are actively pursuing Washington Wizards Forward Caron Butler.
"Come on Eddie, let's get serious."
by biggity2bit on Jun 23, 2009 12:01 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Yeah Kahn!
Maybe he’s reading Canis Hoopus?
Think about it…we’d have a veteran All Star at the 3, plus an additional high pick to address the 5 and the 1…fill in the spaces at #18.
by DougW on Jun 23, 2009 12:04 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
No 18
Two trade scenarios were offered, one involving the 5 and one without it, but both added in 18.
It makes sense, as a team like Washington can get a lot of value as a veteran club by drafting at 18 this year than not. Better for targeting specific needs or going for longer term talent (Austin Daye?).
My guess on the probability of this trade happening in some form is about 20% right now, but increasing with every passing day. Miller offsets Butler’s salary while still providing cap relief next year and competent play this year—even at the same position. Almost makes too much sense not to happen, except that it’d be a straight up Memphis style fleecing. If they do need to move Butler, though, is there honestly a better match out there (Miller + 18 for Butler)? Remember, the whole point is that they can’t afford Butler and not necessarily building a long term winning team.
What’ll be really interesting is what happens at/with #5. I’m sure the Wolves would love to have it, but they Wiz could also get some cap relief using it, so where does that leave us? I think we’d have to give up Foye (who could do really well with a guy like Flip off the bench), and I think we’d have to throw in Cardinal as well so that we could take back one of their other bad contracts (either James or Etan Thomas). I don’t think there’s anyway we get #5 without taking back a bad contract. Maybe it’ll be different for other teams offers to the Wiz, but I don’t see how/why Washington would do anything different for us.
"Come on Eddie, let's get serious."
by biggity2bit on Jun 23, 2009 12:16 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Miller would work well
on a Flip Saunders team too
by oblivionspocket on Jun 23, 2009 12:50 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
That report is total speculation and garbage. Don’t read too much into any of the rumors that all of these “sources” are hearing. Have of the rumors reported to Kahn have been shot down in seconds when they are brought to his attention. Kahn must know the asking price by Wash for Butler and I think he realistically knows there is absolutely no chance. There are so many reasons that Wash would not trade Butler to us and then a scenario where we get Butler AND #5? If Kahn is able to completely fleece Ernie Grunfeld like that I will be so happy that we have the new Kevin Pritchard.
by jballer_13 on Jun 23, 2009 12:17 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Perhaps
Financials will play a big role in whatever happens in Washington. How big a role will be determined after a trade—if it happens—goes down. I think that you are right that the Wiz normally wouldn’t trade Butler at all, but these are precarious times for teams, and I wonder if impact of the financial outlook of the next couple years is being underestimated.
As for the speculation and garbage part, don’t let the author of that blog hear that. The guy is a serious journalist who takes his reputation very seriously—you should check out his take on the Wolves intellectual thievery of his Kevin Love glass cleaner idea. I’m not saying that you’re wrong (or that he’s right), just observing that someone attaching their reputation and actual name to a rumor (especially as a freelancer) carries with it a much higher risk of career suicide than you or I posting rumors on Hoopus.
"Come on Eddie, let's get serious."
by biggity2bit on Jun 23, 2009 12:22 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
I know that the author was the one who broke the Love/Mayo trade so I have respect for him, but it definitely dropped after reading that first trade scenario. Seriously, I could maybe, MAYBE, buy into Butler for Miller + #18. That is still a long shot. But then adding in #5 + Crittendon (a serviceable Bassy like backup) for Foye? That is the dumbest thing I’ve heard in a long time. That is why I was surprised when I saw who wrote it.
by jballer_13 on Jun 23, 2009 12:27 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
After reading the proposal, I had to laugh. No way we get Butler and the five for Foye/Miller + #18. That is totally ridiculous. Even if we take bad contracts back.
WAS obviously wants to win now. Arenas is healthy, they brought in Flip…Need to give them Jefferson, and I would do it in a heartbeat.
by DougW on Jun 23, 2009 12:25 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Agreed.
What do you guys think about Miller + 18 for Butler straight up? I think anything dealing with the fifth pick has to be considered as a separate trade—minimum of Foye and Cardinal, perhaps Rhino, Brewer, Gomes, or Pekovic + taking back a bad contract.
I would think that #5 could bring a lot of relief to Washington if they can trade a bad contract with it, even though I’m not sure how that works salary cap wise.
"Come on Eddie, let's get serious."
by biggity2bit on Jun 23, 2009 12:31 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Exactly that is why I can’t believe they are trying to move Butler. If they hired Flip then why would they be so concerned about next year when they have a healthy Arenas & Haywood this year.
If they are looking to move any of their Big 3 it would be Jamison b/c of his age (33) and contract (3yrs total $33 Mil). Butler is only 29 and has a much more reasonable deal for next year and expires sooner so I don’t see why they trade Butler for someone serviceable then keep Jamison’s cap eating contract on.
by jballer_13 on Jun 23, 2009 12:32 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Box.
With one caveat—will anyone take Jamison, for the very reasons you stated above? At what point will the Wiz have to start sweetening the deal from their end to be rid of Jamison’s contract?
"Come on Eddie, let's get serious."
by biggity2bit on Jun 23, 2009 12:34 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
biggity2bit,
We share an appreciation of Butler’s considerable skills, but these proposals you are throwing out are just ridiculous. Butler’s contract is not bad, he’s a great player, he’s fairly young….we AREN’T getting him for expiring contracts and low draft picks!!!!
jballer,
I am sure WAS would much rather trade Jamison, but who wants him? He and Butler are both 3s, but they are stuck with Jamison. Why not give us Butler and gain a solid 4 in Jefferson?
by DougW on Jun 23, 2009 12:36 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Agreed
Here is a really good post about this topic I just found on RealGM from younggunsmn:
“Personally I feel this is an attempt by Kahn to gauge Miller’s value by asking for a player he doesn’t want and they don’t want to give up. Asking for the moon and settling for what you really wanted in the first place. It’s good gamesmanship. Butler is the move of last resort for them while trying to rid salary, after #5, jamison, and arenas (who no GM in their right mind will take). It will take alot of dickering, but in the end I believe Miller is precisely the veteran the wiz want, it’s just a case of how much salary we take back in return.
Butler is worth more than #5, he’s got 2 years left on a fair contract. If he were 3 or 4 years younger I suspect we’d go hard after him. 20-5-5 with 2 steals and great percentages types of players are hard to come by."
And p.s. the only teams I see interested in Jamison are the Cavs and possibly Rockets. Two teams with big expiring contracts that could use the big man for a title run.
by jballer_13 on Jun 23, 2009 12:41 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Agreed, kind of
I think that if Kahn did in fact make this offer, and wants Butler, plus the #5, that he is probably feeling out WAS, with Love or Jefferson in his back pocket should WAS counter.
I doubt WAS really wants Miller, but they could use him and his contract makes the numbers work should they ask for Love or try to dump a bad contract on us In a Jefferson deal.
I just hope this has legs. I’d REALLY like to get Butler.
by DougW on Jun 23, 2009 12:49 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
If you throw Jefferson into the mix it is a completely different story. Then this rumor would actually be fair value.
by jballer_13 on Jun 23, 2009 12:44 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
I’ve been proposing Jefferson for Butler + the #5 since the lottery. I honestly think the trade works for both teams.
by DougW on Jun 23, 2009 12:50 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Geez
Heat’s ratcheting up a little on this one, eh? Don’t kill the messenger.
I really do understand where you guys are coming from, and probably haven’t made it clear enough that I was passing along the other dude’s proposal along with my thoughts for what the thinking behind it was. I guess I also wasn’t clear enough about the fact that I think if Butler does get moved it will be only for financial reasons, and IF that is the case then I’m genuinely interested in what other offers are out there because it’d help me assess just what type of value Miller has in this market.
Trust me, I hate ridiculous trade proposals that are one-sided as much as anybody on Hoopus, and I apologize if y’all got the impression that that’s what I was suggesting. What I think is very interesting about Washington—and what might be interesting about this whole draft and FA—is how much the economy is going to change how teams do things.
Everyone keeps saying Washington is going to have to dump salary. OK, I’ll buy that. My question is—how are they going to do that? I’m not saying that they have to trade Butler to do that (although they certainly could). I am saying that I think they’re going to have to give more than they’d like in order to get cap relief, and that creates an opportunity for a team like the Wolves. And if they aren’t looking to shed salary, then I don’t think they’ll make a trade at all.
"Come on Eddie, let's get serious."
by biggity2bit on Jun 23, 2009 12:55 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Apologies if I am coming on too aggressively. I just think Butler is the last guy WAS looks to dump if they are shedding salary. It seems to me they’d much rather throw Mike James and Etan Thomas in with the #5, which is why I think we actually have to include a good player if we want to do this deal. And I really think we should want to do this deal.
by DougW on Jun 23, 2009 1:01 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Also apologize if I came off a bit fiery. I usually post on Strib’s Wolves blog but have stopped b/c of all the ridiculous rubes claiming for facts that these crazy trades will go through. It’s clear you know your stuff and I’m always up for a spirited debate.
by jballer_13 on Jun 23, 2009 1:05 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Word
I agree. I think this whole Washington thing can go so many different ways.
They could keep 5.
They could trade 5 and bloated contracts for expirings.
They could trade Jamison for expirings, but probably either 5 this year (which seems too much) or a future first.
They could trade Butler, which also doesn’t make a lot of sense unless he’s the only way to get rid of the contract fat, but then you’d be making a trade with a huge amount of salaries getting exchanged which also seems unlikely.
I’d love to be a fly on the wall to find out exactly what Kahn’s interest is with Washington. Seems like a total crapshoot to me, as most trades seem rather unreasonable when you look at them, but you also realize that some of them could squeek through because of other factors (economy, Washington decides to go all in to win now, etc.)
"Come on Eddie, let's get serious."
by biggity2bit on Jun 23, 2009 1:20 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
save $$$
I think the Wizards want to find a way to save $$ this year and yet acquire players to help them be more competitive. How do the Wolves pull off a trade with Washington that saves the Wizards a ton of cash this year?
For example, a trade of Etan Thomas and the #5 pick to MN for Mike MIller and the #18 pick doesn’t really save Washington any money this year (or next year!). They pay less for the pick but Mike Miller makes more money than Etan Thomas and both of their deals expire at the end of the year.
Does anyone know if, under the cap rules, the Wolves can trade Jason Collins without signing him? Or Perhaps Collins can resign but implicitly agree to an inexpensive buyout (fat chance). The wolves need some kind of a trade exception (or something) to save the Wizards money this year. Even Mike James has an expiring contract so washington will save money this year or in the future if they trade him for approximately equal salary.
If the Wolves could trade Miller and some sort of “free salary” that Washington does not have to pay or can buyout for pennies on the dollar and the Wolves take back Thomas and Mike James, they could probably pull off the trade without even including #18.
Another option is Stevenson for Foye, since Stevenson’s contract runs longer. So that at least saves Washington money next year.
The key is saving the Wizards money this year and possibly in the future. That was clearly the key to the Spurs-Bucks richard Jefferson deal.
by littleboxes on Jun 23, 2009 5:04 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Enter the Blazers....
….they have two guys with partially guaranteed contracts. The Wolves don’t. The Blazers could also be enough under the cap to perform a lopsided trade that could be them simply swallowing a salary and a pick. That being said, I think the Wiz are in win now mode and they may be looking for something a bit more useful this year in terms of on the court abilities. Outlaw + Blake might be enough.
The Wolves have Miller and Foye who could help right away and they would save the Wiz roughly $5 mil by taking the #5 pick off their hands. Let’s say they do something along the lines of Miller, Foye, 28, and Pekovic for, say, Thomas, James, and #5. The Wiz save about $1.2 mil on the deal in existing salary and about $2.7 mil in getting rid of the #5 pick. Because they’re over the lux mark, you can double that number. They can then draft a Euro player with 28 and wait for Pekovic to come over in 2 years to play PF next to McGee. All in all, they pick up Foye and Miller while saving almost $8 mil because of the lux mark. They also, I would argue, improve their team…especially with Flip’s offense. Foye and Miller are custom-made for that system.
The World's Leading Exporter of Small Area Quickness
www.canishoopus.com
by Stop-n-Pop on Jun 23, 2009 5:47 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
I really like this idea
Including Pekovic, Foye and Miller along with the #28 is a lot of assets for the #5 pick, but rightfully so. I haven’t read a rumor of a superior offer.
Further, it would preserve the #18, to do a #2 for #5 + #18 swap with Memphis if they are interested. I don’t think I would combine #5 and #6 to get up to #2, but I think #5 and #18 could be enough. The stated goal was to have no more than two rookies on the roster, so I would think #18 would be on the table for something.
by Ebomb on Jun 23, 2009 6:05 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Looks like
We both were a little too generous…Nice trade by Kahn.
by Ebomb on Jun 23, 2009 7:01 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Posted on June 23rd, 2009 – 6:39 PM
bq. By Jerry Zgoda
bq.
bq. SI.com just reported what I’ve been working for the last 30 minutes to confirm: The Wolves and Wizards have struck a deal that will bring the No. 5 pick, Etan Thomas, Darius Songaila and Oleksiy Pecherov to Minnesota for Randy Foye and Mike Miller.
That would give the Wolves the Nos. 5 and 6 picks.
by levi_mn on Jun 23, 2009 7:22 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Yes
Very nice trade indeed. Sounds like we got the better of it too from the Wiz fan’s perspectives.
"Come on Eddie, let's get serious."
by biggity2bit on Jun 24, 2009 8:51 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
And Strib boards?
Ugh. You’re braver and more patient or tolerant than I am.
"Come on Eddie, let's get serious."
by biggity2bit on Jun 23, 2009 1:23 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
should we be tryin ta git Rondo mayn??
MAYN HOL UP!
by MAYNHOLUP on Jun 23, 2009 11:58 AM CDT reply actions 0 recs
Hell no.
He’s young and very talented and by rights should be the last guy the C’s are looking to trade, and yet he keeps popping up in trade rumors. Something’s wrong with the due. Oh, and he’s a cheapshotting punk. No thanks.
by Xand1 on Jun 23, 2009 1:11 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
yeah...
…something has to be weird for them to want to move him so quickly.
The World's Leading Exporter of Small Area Quickness
www.canishoopus.com
by Stop-n-Pop on Jun 23, 2009 1:38 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
I think the Cs are a little upset with Rondo after the playoffs. He had a few great games in the first round, then got shot happy (without making them) for the balance. I think Rondo is unhappy with his little brother role and the Celtics figure his value is up.
by DougW on Jun 23, 2009 1:53 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Don't piss off Doc Rivers?
“http://bleacherreport.com/articles/203456-the-future-of-rajon-rondo”
After disagreeing with his coach Doc Rivers after the Game Seven loss to the Magic in a post game interview, it seems Rondo took his own direction. He didn’t talk about the mistakes or missed jump shots he had, but rather decided to question the coaching decisions
by levi_mn on Jun 23, 2009 2:00 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
my gut says this is only a wake-up call.
i.e., “yes, rajon. just like that you can be playing for a rebuilding team. get it? we’re effen serious.”
unless rondo is absolutely killing their chemistry (which seems hard to imagine with so many alpha dogs in that locker room), i can’t see them actually proposing some deal with a real chance to get through. can you think of another young point guard of his caliber whose current team would even think to float him in trade scenarios?
by TheH on Jun 23, 2009 2:07 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Agree...
Based on his playoffs, the Celtics might be looking at this as a “Sell High” opportunity for a guy with an attitude that’s about to get expensive. I’d pass…
"I'm gonna make you cry...I'm gonna make you cry and dip my cookie in your tears!!!"
by mutleyil on Jun 23, 2009 2:24 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
I'm confused unless Rondo was a complete cancer
He’s on the verge at the very least of being an elite NBA PG. He’s actually got a relatively solid TS% and EFG% to go with being a very capable rebounder and creator for a 1. This says nothing about his defensive capabilities. He struggled shooting in the playoffs- but even then he had a huge positive impact on the games. If rumors were true about Boston wanting “Tyreke Evans” then do it up. Rondo projects as a very superior long-range player to anyone the Wolves would actually sign in 2010.
by Jose Cordoba on Jun 23, 2009 2:40 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
did you hear about the rondo and allen to detroit for prince/rip/stuckey proposed deal? it was detroit that blinked and turned it down, but i love that deal for them. it’s risky, but gives them the money to make a run at wade, resign rondo, and get one more free agent who’s not a first option type, but could be the 3rd or 4th best guy on a contender. if they were to say, land earl clark, in the draft (possibly his ideal situation if detroit got rondo and a big time player in 2010), that team looks absolutely terrifying.
heart of a champion, will of the warrior.
by cap'n hack on Jun 23, 2009 3:02 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
I would have said "Yes" if I'm Detroit
1. Hamilton’s doesn’t have a good contract- his extension was a bizzare move.
2. Rondo’s vastly superior to Stuckey
3. Tayshaun Prince is still quite solid. Although considering the Cap Space and PG upgrade- this seems like a good balancer.
by Jose Cordoba on Jun 23, 2009 3:10 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
if boston doesn’t think rondo is a complete cancer, i can’t imagine why they keep shopping him. he’s not on the verge of being an elite point guard, he is an elite point guard. he needs to be in the “second best point guard in the nba” discussion. i think he’s somewhere between 3 and 5 myself, but he’s at least worth a mention for the “chris paul runner up” award.
heart of a champion, will of the warrior.
by cap'n hack on Jun 23, 2009 3:16 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Little bit overrated...
Rondo is a little bit overrated, but still a very solid player. If he could shoot, he would be an elite point guard. But he can’t, and he doesn’t have nearly the playmaking ability of a young Jason Kidd, who was able to dominate, despite inconsistent shooting. Rondo’s assist numbers are inflated by dribbling all over and passing to hall of fame scorers, who are ready and willing to shoot. He’s not a great offensive player, yet.
He’s a Top 10 point guard, and maybe better than that, but he’s light years behind Paul, Williams, Parker and Billups.
by Andy G on Jun 23, 2009 3:24 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
I have trouble believing these reports...
Rondo seems like a guy any team would want to build around. It is too bad the Wolves assets aren’t of the veteran ilk that would interest Boston.
The guy averaged 16.9 ppg/9.7 rpg/9.8 apg in the playoffs. Given that he was the 3rd scoring option that is amazing. Playing next to Ray Allen and Paul Pierce is the perfect situation for him.
by Pants_ on Jun 23, 2009 3:32 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
The Wolves are just waiting
to trade AlJeff back to the Celtics for Rondo.
by PoorDick on Jun 23, 2009 3:40 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Yeah, he’s good, as were his playoff #‘s, but didn’t like every game in that series go to at least one OT? It puts it back into perspective when you realize he did those things in like 50 minutes of PT.
by Xand1 on Jun 23, 2009 3:43 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
his true shooting percentage is decent, just slightly below average and it’s important to remember what he does on the defensive side of the ball and as a rebounder. he’s a good offensive player and a phenomenal defensive player. gotta be in the top 5 for point guards. i’d put him behind paul (obviously), williams and billups, but ahead of parker.
heart of a champion, will of the warrior.
by cap'n hack on Jun 23, 2009 3:35 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Parker
can make a case for league’s best point guard. He completely buys into the team system in San Antonio, but can take over a game like no other point guard, when the matchups are right and Pop calls his number. I don’t think there’s any doubt that he’s a better player than Rondo.
But after Parker (and Paul/Williams/Billups), I think there’s a big group of point guards that are tough to compare, for different reasons. Rose is going to be better than Rondo, based on unbelievable physical talents, but he isn’t necessarily there, yet. Nash is on his way out, but still very good. Jameer Nelson beat out Rondo for last year’s All-Star team. Baron Davis, when happy, is a better offensive player than Rondo. Devin Harris and Monta Ellis are much better scorers than Rondo, but probably wouldn’t fit in as well in Boston.
I just think Rajon had a great series against Chicago, and people are placing a lot of importance on those 7 games, versus the 82 played before them. Some of it is justified, since playoffs mean more, but you also need to look at the whole picture. He’s not consistently as good as he was vs Chicago.
by Andy G on Jun 23, 2009 3:53 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
in fairness, i’ve yet to mention his playoff series vs the bulls. his true shooting is about 2% away from average (for the whole season) and you totally avoided the defensive side of the ball in your rundown of point guards. rondo is the best defensive point guard in the league right now and considering how much you are underrating him on offense and ignoring his rebounding ability, there’s a case to be made for him as the second best point guard in the league. defense is half the game.
any argument against paul as the best point guard in the league is silly at its face. please don’t blaspheme cp3 by giving some other point guard his title without going into extreme depth to make your point.
heart of a champion, will of the warrior.
by cap'n hack on Jun 23, 2009 4:10 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Also in fairness...
I didn’t mention how terrible Rondo was at defense, when the reigning DPOY was gone in Round 1 vs. Chicago. Maybe he’s a beneficiary of Garnett roaming the paint behind him, more than he’s a true stopper. He certainly feels free to aggressively go for steals, we know that.
I didn’t mean to say that Paul isn’t the best PG in the league—it may have come across that way. But, I’d give Deron half that crown. I think they are comparable talents, with Deron being the better scorer and Paul being the better ball-handler. They are both outstanding passers. Paul gets more credit for defense, but when I’ve seen both, I don’t see much difference there. Maybe Paul gets more steals—I don’t know. When they match up head to head, Deron usually does pretty well, with worse surrounding talent.
But yeah, Rondo isn’t even close to the second-best point guard in the league, and he never will be. It doesn’t mean he’s not a very good player, or that he didn’t play great (on offense) vs Chicago in the playoffs. But, put him on an average team and his production would drop right with his perceived value. He wouldn’t help the Wolves much more than Telfair, with what he’d be passing to. You don’t get assists for dumping it into Jefferson in the post, I don’t think—at least not with the dribbles he usually takes.
by Andy G on Jun 23, 2009 4:18 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Trade- 1
Chad Ford Reports
To SA:
Richard Jefferson
To Mil:
Fabrico Oberto
Kurt Thomas
Bruce Bowen
Milwaukee saves a few million this year plus 15 Million in 2011. This trade would be fair to be called a salary Dump.
by Jose Cordoba on Jun 23, 2009 12:11 PM CDT reply actions 0 recs
Definite Salary Dump
And very little value for a player that can contribute in Richard Jefferson. I hope this helps lower the expectations in Washington for #5.
by Ebomb on Jun 23, 2009 12:17 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Almost the exact package the Spurs had been rumored to have offered NJ for VC. Very interesting as it has potential the Bucks are confident Jefferson won’t re-sign or that they have no need for him in rebuilding. It does show that the Spurs realize how little time they have if they are trying to pull blockbusters like this.
by jballer_13 on Jun 23, 2009 12:20 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
My heart stopped...
when I read “Spurs trade 3 players for Jefferson.”
Thankfully, it was Richard, and not Al.
by Andy G on Jun 23, 2009 12:25 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
i’m not sure how much this changes anything in the west. jefferson isn’t exactly a season changer anymore and who replaces oberto and thomas on the post for the spurs? thomas could still defend the post pretty well. it’ll be interesting to see where they go from here, because it looks like one of the shallowest contenders in the west just traded a fair amount of depth for a little more talent.
heart of a champion, will of the warrior.
by cap'n hack on Jun 23, 2009 12:50 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
I agree
SA was capped out before this trade, and is even moreso now. The post players on their roster are Duncan, Bonner, Mahini and Hill. Yikes.
by Ebomb on Jun 23, 2009 12:55 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
My guess is SA will target someone like Ioannis Bourosis
with a MLE.
by Jose Cordoba on Jun 23, 2009 12:58 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
What the hell is that? Sounds like something you’d pick up on a trip to the Amazon.
by Xand1 on Jun 23, 2009 1:12 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
yeah, and duncan’s getting up there in years. they desperately need someone to spell him during the season.
heart of a champion, will of the warrior.
by cap'n hack on Jun 23, 2009 12:58 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Maybe a guy like Chris Andersen or Marcin Gortat with part of the MLE. Maybe (BIG maybe) they could attract a guy like Iverson to take the MLE and play nice for a year to get a free ride to a ring. That would be crazy but crazier things have happened.
by jballer_13 on Jun 23, 2009 1:03 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Like Karl Malone on the Lakers with Gary Payton?
"Come on Eddie, let's get serious."
by biggity2bit on Jun 23, 2009 1:20 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
I wouldn't be surprised if Rasheed Wallace winds up in San Antonio
by Eric in Madison on Jun 23, 2009 1:23 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
An awesome team...but
It would be interesting to see how Rasheed would play it out w/ Greg Popovich.
If Wallace did go there, it pretty much means the Spurs are dead once Duncan retires. I’m sure they’re thinking about life after Timmy.
I think the Jefferson trade is a great move by the Spurs.
by levi_mn on Jun 23, 2009 2:15 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
I think good teams like to have Wallace
I think he works hard, and he cares. He helped get Detroit a title.
Pop clearly doesn’t mind guys who complain about calls—nobody complains to refs more than Duncan.
by Eric in Madison on Jun 23, 2009 2:30 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
If I had to guess
The Bucks hope would be that either Thomas or Bowen hang it up clearing enough Cap Space to resign CV and Ramon Sessions.
by Jose Cordoba on Jun 23, 2009 12:26 PM CDT reply actions 0 recs
The One Problem for the Spurs
is that they commited 15 Million towards Richard Jefferson next summer- taking away any chance at making a run at Chris Bosh.
by Jose Cordoba on Jun 23, 2009 12:29 PM CDT reply actions 0 recs
Just to clarify
it sounds like Bowen and Oberto have only partially guarnateed contracts. So the Bucks can clear serious coin (6 Million) to resign CV And Ramon Sessions. If this is true- I totally see the logic behind the Bucks move.
by Jose Cordoba on Jun 23, 2009 12:41 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Hollinger’s Euro Preview was posted today and it ranks Nikola Pekovic as the best player in Europe whose rights are held by an NBA team.
It projects his NBA PER to be 18.36, ahead of guys like Tiago Splitter, Fran Vasquez, and Josh Childress, and gives the following rundown on him
Nikola Pekovic (Timberwolves) has been the highest-rated player in the Euroleague each of the past two years. An onerous contract is likely to keep him in Europe for a few more years, and the Wolves aren’t exactly hurting for bruising big men right now. But he projects as a quality power forward with an impressive scoring rate, and sooner or later he’ll be in the NBA.
Now might be the best time to use him in a deal as he’s already tops in europe. Is Pekovic enough of a sweetner to get #5 from Washington or #2 from Memphis?
by Ebomb on Jun 23, 2009 12:37 PM CDT reply actions 0 recs
When do the rights to Pekovic expire?
I couldn’t find a source…but if memory serves, it was two years. I think they can also make a one year offer to him to hold those rights.
Still, at the moment, Pekovich is really just another draft pick (value=$0) in salary cap / trading calculations.
Not much value on the trading block that I see.
by levi_mn on Jun 23, 2009 1:43 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
I believe that they never expire
The Wolves hold his NBA rights until they trade them.
I think his trade value is not real high, but it might serve as a sweetener to get something done.
by Eric in Madison on Jun 23, 2009 1:50 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
They can expire
But only if Pekovic stops playing basketball in a Non-NBA league and sits out for a year…
If the player is already under contract to, or signs a contract with a non-NBA team, the team retains the player’s draft rights for one year after the player’s obligation to the non-NBA team ends. Essentially, the clock stops as long as the player plays pro ball outside the NBA. Players are not included in the team’s team salary during the regular season while the player is under contract with a non-NBA team.
by Ebomb on Jun 23, 2009 1:52 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Thanks Ebomb -- here's the source:
Larry Coon’s “Salary Cap FAQ”:
http://members.cox.net/lmcoon/salarycap.htm
Don’t know how I overlooked that section…
by levi_mn on Jun 23, 2009 2:33 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
ESPN reporting R. Jefferson to Spurs went through
The report says that the teams agreed in principle already. Here’s the link:
http://sports.espn.go.com/nba/news/story?id=4281291
Wow, I bet Kobe’s championship celebration just got cut short.
by jballer_13 on Jun 23, 2009 12:48 PM CDT reply actions 0 recs
Yep
the Spurs are apparently loading up for one more run with this core. Makes sense. Hard for that team to stay healthy, but it helps you nurse Ginobli through the regular season if you have Jefferson on the roster.
by Eric in Madison on Jun 23, 2009 12:50 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
de bucks gone be
de worss team in de league ta wotch nexx year mayn
MAYN HOL UP!
by MAYNHOLUP on Jun 23, 2009 1:20 PM CDT reply actions 0 recs
Good to hear...
That someone is taking that distinction from the T-Wolves!
by mnjayhawk on Jun 23, 2009 1:23 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
The trade is actually really solid for them. I actually really like it from their perspective. They must’ve realized they were going nowhere with Jefferson for two more years so not only did they get expiring contracts for him, most of those contracts weren’t guaranteed. So now they can buy out Oberto and Bowen and take a really small hit in cap. This will allow them to re-sign Sessions & Villanueva as well as give them flexibility next year.
by jballer_13 on Jun 23, 2009 1:31 PM CDT reply actions 0 recs
The Richard Jefferson trade...
…gives me alot of hope that my belief that legitimate NBA starters are available this off-season for essentially free if you’re willing to take on the salary commitment. It’d be great if the T-Wolves capped off a great draft night by doing a similiar deal like the Spurs just did.
Also, if everyone is healthy in S.A. they will be legitimate contenders for the NBA championship next season. Jefferson as your fourth option is pretty dang good.
by twolvesgm on Jun 23, 2009 2:10 PM CDT reply actions 0 recs
Key phrase:
“if you’re willing to take on the salary commitment.”
by PoorDick on Jun 23, 2009 2:33 PM CDT reply actions 0 recs

by 












