Building a Winner Update, pt. iv: Free Agency and Wrapping Things Up
OK folks, we've finally made it to the last post in our updated series of Building a Winner posts. You can read part one (Basketball Operations) here, part two (the draft) here, and part three (trades) here. In this post we'll talk about the Wolves' free agent prospects as well as presenting a course that we think the Wolves could take to fielding a winning squad.
Let's start with the free agents.
There has been a ridiculous amount of hype built up around the 2010 free agent class. With potential single-name free agents like LeBron, Kobe, Dirk, Yao, Amare, and D-Wade, big media outlets like Four Letter have started the frenzy early. What is not as widely discussed is the quality of the 2009 class. It is pretty decent.
At the top of the class are UFAs Hedo Turkoglu, Ben Gordon, Carlos Boozer, Mehmet Okur, Jason Kidd, Lamar Odom, Mike Bibby, Andre Miller, Ron Artest, and Rasheed Wallace. If you are a championship team looking for a final piece, this is the free agent season for you. While guys like Turkoglu, Gordon, and Boozer are probably looking to cash out for as much as possible, it probably isn't unreasonable to think that a guy like Kidd, Miller, Bibby, Odom, or Wallace could take an MLE on a team like, say, the Spurs. If they don't, this class is filled with 2nd tier guys with tremendous value to a winning franchise: Anderson Varejao, Chris Anderson, Trevor Ariza, Matt Barnes, Kyle Korver, and Zaza Pachulia. Even guys like Dahntay Jones and Bobby Jackson could play some decent minutes off the bench on a winning squad.
On the restricted side of things, there are a bunch of players who may have played themselves out of their team's price range with their performances in 08/09: Glen Davis, Raymond Felton, Linas Kleiza, Ramon Sessions, Charlie Villanueva, Marcin Gortat, and Paul Milsap. It is hard to imagine a scenario where all of these players remain with their squads. Also, don't forget Atlanta's pair of RFAs, Josh Childress and Marvin Williams.
Free agency-wise, the Wolves are in a pretty interesting situation. They don't have any big free agent choices to make on their own, and they aren't facing an off-season as negatively turbulent as division-mates Jazz (9 potential free agents) or the Nuggets (7 potential free agents and salary cap hell). They aren't, however, in a position to cash out a top free agent. Depending on how things work out in the draft and with any potential trade, the Wolves are looking at coming in somewhere in the neighborhood of $51-54 mil in 09/10 salary. With a projected cap of under $60 mil, this isn't exactly a lot to work with. Without a sign-and-trade, you can throw out the idea of signing guys like Hedo, Ben Gordon, and any of the other top tier UFAs. Marcin Gortat is a name that pops up quite a bit among rabid fans but the only likely way the Wolves could sign him would be with the MLE...which Orlando could then turn around and use to match. Yes, they will have to get creative in order to sign Hedo, but they still have the same exceptions as the Wolves and I'm not really sure why a guy would want to go from a sweet backup assignment for an NBA Finalist in Florida to a 24 win team in Minnesota. Gortat is a nice player and he would fill a need with the Wolves but a) he's probably not worth the MLE, and b) even if he was, it would be a stretch for him to come here over what he could still likely get in Orlando (or with another winning squad in need of a bigman). Also, please keep in mind that if the Wolves are a sub-cap team, they either have to renounce their exceptions or have them count as a cap hold. This means the Wolves have two likely choices of action: renounce the cap hold and hope to sign a free agent to a modest deal under the cap or accept the cap hold and use it to sign a single free agent. Folks, this likely means guys like Gortat, Ariza, and Williams are probably not an option for the Wolves simply because they will cost more than the MLE....which the team could renounce in the first place.
I suspect that Paul Milsap will be the most targeted of the RFAs. I would not at all be surprised if he is moved in a sign-and-trade involving draft picks. Seeing that he plays power forward, let's just throw him out the Wolves window. Ditto for Big Baby and Villanueva.
Getting around to the main point of all this free agent talk, the Wolves aren't going to be able to be big free agency players this off season. Ramon Sessions and Raymond Felton are interesting options because both can play the point but the Wolves are sitting in a point-heavy draft with (likely) first dibs on the second best available point (maybe even the best depending on your thoughts on Ricky Rubio). In terms of assets, it's hard to beat the $2.6 mil/year rookie salary at #6; especially when comparing it with a full MLE for Sessions or Felton.
So what does all of this mean for Our Beloved Puppies?
The Wolves currently have $17.7 mil locked up in 2010 salaries (if you include this year's 3 1st round draft picks). They have somewhere in the neighborhood of $22-25 mil in expiring 2010 deals, with 2 or 3 of these guys (Mike Miller, Craig Smith, and Corey Brewer) being functional rotation players. They are not a hot free agent destination. What they are is a team that will clear large amounts of cap space in 2010 and 2011 and who can take on relatively bloated contracts from teams that want to unload some dead salary for more temporary and functional options. The Wolves needed to move about $10 mil in salary this past season in order to compete for top-shelf 09 free agents. This was why we made such a big fuss two seasons ago about not using Theo Ratliff for acquiring 08/09 expiring contracts. They had a fantastic opportunity to be a big fish in a little pond. Now, they're looking at swimming around with a lot of money in 2010...in a pool filled with bigger fish.
Where am I going with this? I'm talking about the Wolves improving with a trade, not free agency. I'm talking about targeting guys with money on the books beyond 2010. Who are these players? Vince Carter, Eddy Curry, Gerald Wallace, Jose Calderon, Erick Dampier, Kirk Hinrich, Jason Terry, Carmelo, Nene, Andris Biedrins, Jason Richardson, Andrei Kirilenko, and, on the very high and somewhat delusional end of the spectrum, D-Will and CP3. All of these players are on teams that face radical changes brought about by finances/economy or prior bad management. Denver and the Jazz both face a ton of tough free agent decisions that could rip apart their clubs. New Jersey and Charlotte are hemorrhaging money with bad teams. Phoenix and Dallas are aging greats that will have to make tough decisions in the next few years. Toronto and GSW have both made very weird decisions of late and are facing big changes.
The hope here is that the Wolves could offer up a package of expiring contracts + the rights to Pekovic for one of these players + an additional player or pick. How much would the Knicks be willing to pay to have Curry taken off their hands? Would the Nets be willing to part with a conditional 1st or a 2nd rounder + CDR to take Vincanity off the books?
Personally, I think the prizes for the Wolves are Gerald Wallace, Andris Biedrins, Kirk Hinrich, or Andrei Kirilenko. I'd like to see them start with Hinrich and AK47. I have this approach in mind:
- To the Jazz:
- Brian Cardinal
- Mark Madsen
- Craig Smith
- Ryan Gomes or Randy Foye
- Return of Utah's 1st round pick
To the Wolves:
- Andrei Kirilenko
- Kosta Koufos
The Wolves make this deal because they gain a starting small forward and a young 7 footer. The Jazz make this deal because they get rid of the $16/17 mil they are spending on a bench player while gaining a back up 2, a backup 4, and the return of a future 1st round pick. I don't think they can get more of a return for AK47. The Wolves give up very little in terms of long term impact to get this done. The future 1st hurts a little, but when you consider that they would be getting Koufos, it's well worth it.
Moving right into the last part of this post, let's tie in our ideal draft and trade scenarios to see how the Wolves can put together a path to success.
First, the Wolves should do their best to trade Mike Miller to the Bulls for Kirk Hinrich. This trade makes sense for both teams. The Wolves should even consider throwing in the rights to Nikola Pekovic to make it happen. They should then draft either Stephen Curry or James Harden with the #6 pick. I'd prefer Curry but either player would be worthwhile. With the 18th pick in the draft they should take the BPA between Austin Daye and Sam Young. With the 28th pick they should take the BPA between Nick Calathes, Rodrigue Beaubois, or Patrick Mills, all three of whom could play overseas if need be....which they would then be asked to do for a single season. For the sake of this little experiment (and for the sake of the most realistic draft possible) I will go with Curry at 6, Young at 18, and Beaubois at 28.
They should then offer a 2 year contract to Sheldon Williams leaving them with a 12-man roster of:
- Al Jefferson
- Kirk Hinrich
- Ryan Gomes (I'm throwing Foye in the Utah trade)
- Kevin Love
- Corey Brewer
- Sebastian Telfair
- Bobby Brown (player option, yo!)
- Stephen Curry
- Sam Young
- Andrei Kirilenko
- Kosta Koufos
- Sheldon Williams
The rotation would go as follows:
- Curry/Bassy/Brown
- Hinrich/Brewer/Young
- Kirilenko/Gomes/Young
- Love/Williams/Koufos
- Jefferson/Williams/Koufos
When Brown comes off the books they can bring over Calathes/Beaubois/Mills. When Williams comes off the books, they can bring over Pekovic (if he's not included in the Bulls deal). This lineup gives them significant (and realistic) talent upgrades at the 1, 2, and 3 while moving Gomes, Bassy, and Brewer to the bench and giving the team the option of bringing along three young players in the rotation (with a fourth coming over next year after Brown clears the books).
While Kirilenko's contract is an albatross ($16.4 next year, $17.8 the year after that), Hinrich has a declining deal and they both could be added to the squad without completely breaking the bank. The total estimated cost for the above roster in 2010 would be $59.3 mil. The total estimated cost for 2011 would be $63 mil. It also places the Wolves in a solid position to have productive off-seasons in 2011 and 2012, with between $20.5 to 24.2 mil coming off the books after 10/11 and upwards of $10 mil the year after that. We will go into what Kirilenko brings in terms of play in a future post, but just know this: he is significantly above average in 2 year adj +/-, Roland Rating, and WARP. He is somewhat misused by Jerry Sloan and he is a significantly positive net performer at the small forward position.
If Big Al is healthy, this is a team that could compete right away. It would be a team with a legitimate shot at the playoffs. Last season Randy Foye and Ryan Gomes led the team in minutes played. Guys like Brian Cardinal (23% of team minutes played), Kevin Ollie (21%), Jason Collins (11%), and Rodney Carney (30%) would all be replaced with significantly more productive players. Prominent players like Telfair (53%) and Gomes (66%) would be scaled back to reserve levels and their lost minutes would be filled by Hinrich, Curry, and Kirilenko. Remember, the big problem with the team after Big Al went down wasn't that his minutes were filled by Kevin Love; it was that Kevin Love's minutes were filled by sub-par players. The same concept applies here; the Wolves field 5 average or above average starters while fielding a capable bench rotation with starting experience.
This lineup also gives the Wolves the best opportunity to bring Curry along at the point. Hinrich is the perfect back court pairing for Curry. He can share point duties while being able to defend up to three different positions. Let's take a look at what these three new players would do to the Wolves' starting lineup. Here is what we saw with last year's squad:
| WARP | PER | WS/40 | |
| Bassy | -1.1 | 9.2 | 1.9 |
| Foye | 0.9 | 13.6 | 3.6 |
| Gomes | -1.0 | 12.4 | 5.2 |
| Love | 7.4 | 18.3 | 12.9 |
| Jefferson | 8.3 | 23.1 | 12.3 |
Now let's take a peak at what the new starting lineup would look like:
| WARP | PER | WS/40 | |
| Curry | |||
| Hinrich | 2.0 | 13.8 | 5.6 |
| Kirilenko | 5.8 | 16.8 | 8.6 |
| Love | 7.4 | 18.3 | 12.9 |
| Jefferson | 8.3 | 23.1 | 12.3 |
Obviously, Curry will be key to this scenario working, but, as we mentioned above, he will have Hinrich to lean on with a capable backup in Telfair. All he has to do is play at replacement level during his 1st year with a PER above 10 and a WS/40 above 3 (which are VERY modest goals) and he will be a significant upgrade over what the team had last season. Plugging those numbers into this scenario, the Wolves' starting five would gain 9.0 wins above replacement level and 7.5 WS/40. Unless Curry is an absolute bust, anything extra he brings to the squad can be put on top of this very modest expectation.
Another benefit to this new scenario is that it places guys like Telfair, Gomes, and Brewer in situations where the net production of their opponents will be less than what it was when they were pulling minutes as starters. In other words, the hope here is that they will be more effective going up against fellow bench players than they were against starters.
That pretty much wraps things up. We think we have created a realistic scenario that would give the Wolves a solid team with a chance to compete both in the short term and the long run. The team would be adding two high-priced vets but they would also be adding a large infusion of young talent with Koufos, Young, Curry, and Beaubois. All of these players could be brought along either slowly (Young, Beaubois, and Koufos) or with someone to lean on (Curry). The hope for all of this relies on Big Al and the Big Piranha taking the next steps in their development as well as Curry developing into a legit scoring threat at the point. This is a team that would have significant flexibility with the types of lineups it could place on the floor. It could go long/big (Hinrich, Brewer, Kirilenko, Jefferson, Koufos), up-tempo (Bassy, Curry, Brewer, Love, Koufos), or athletic (Beaubois, Brewer, Young, Kirilenko, Koufos), in addition to the starting lineup we talked about above. Most importantly, despite the addition of Kirilenko and Hinrich, it is a roster that doesn't break the bank and allows for some financial flexibility from 2010/11 on.
What say you?
0 recs |
128 comments
|
Comments
Sounds pretty genius to me. Not particularly crazy about either Kirlenko or Hinrich, but the sum of the moves looks sweet. And, even better, it all appears fairly doable.
I think we’d probably be more of a fringe playoff team with this lineup, but that is a huge, huge improvement.
by DougW on Jun 5, 2009 8:50 AM CDT reply actions 0 recs
I still think
A Childress sign and trade would be possible- for something like Gomes and 18. This team would be vastly better on the Defensive end with AK 47 and Captain Kirk with a healthy Brewer.
by Jose Cordoba on Jun 5, 2009 9:08 AM CDT reply actions 0 recs
What I appreciate most
I really appreciate the reality of the post and propositions made, in that they are realistic (at least more realistic than getting CP3 for example). I hadn’t realized just how difficult it was going to be for the Wolves to be active in FA this year—makes me happy that we have a lot of assets to work with in terms of trades.
I also think the strategy of taking on some contracts that expire in ’10 or ’11 might not be that bad of an idea, because it seems like everyone is loading up for the 2010 FA class, and thus there will be a huge demand for a handful of guys, and when they sign there will be a bunch of teams that might overspend on the remaining players to fill out their squads and fill up (some of) their cap space. My point is that with everyone focusing on 2010, 2011 and 12 might be good years (and relatively easy years) to be big players. Besides, our team is young enough that we might be ready to make that one last move to get the guy to put us over the top.
I’d also be curious to hear more about the Childress angle. Do we have enough to do two trades—one with Utah and one with Atlanta? Is it even worth it? I think Childress would be a tremendous addition, and to be honest I’d rather have him than AK47, but I’d love to have both. Can anyone fill me in as to whether this is a good idea, or how the roster would have to shuffle?
"Come on Eddie, let's get serious."
by biggity2bit on Jun 5, 2009 9:11 AM CDT reply actions 0 recs
In this scenario...
…the only way Childress could be had would be if the Wolves did not renounce the MLE and he signed it. This isn’t out of the realm of possibility. He would make more with the MLE than he did in Europe. I don’t know if Atlanta would match it or what they have in mind for the guy (or if he would even want to come to Minny), but that’s the way they could do it. They would add about $5 mil to the cap but they would still be under the luxury mark. He would have to be used with a combo of minutes from Gomes and Brewer. Another option would be that this could put the 18th pick in play. By getting Childress, they don’t need a guy like Young and could move the pick…saving some money and having to deal with one less player.
I think the Wolves are best served making trades for proven players that are a bit overpaid rather than hitting the free agent market. By making a trade, they aren’t saddled down with a 4 or 5 year deal that would come with their own free agent signing. They overpay up front for guys like Hinrich and Kirilinko but they save on the back end by not having the last 2-3 years of a huge deal as well as gaining flexibility when those guys clear the books.
The World's Leading Exporter of Small Area Quickness
www.canishoopus.com
by Stop-n-Pop on Jun 5, 2009 9:52 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Assuming Childress would sign
I would say this is a fantastic use of the 18th pick. Draft Curry or Harden at 6, and a PG at 28. Essentially ‘drafting’ Childress at 18 would be awesome—especially pairing him with one of the afore mentioned #6 picks.
"Come on Eddie, let's get serious."
by biggity2bit on Jun 5, 2009 9:55 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
If...
…my reading of the CBA is correct, I believe the Wolves and Hawks can do a straight up sign and trade for the 18th pick and Childress.
The World's Leading Exporter of Small Area Quickness
www.canishoopus.com
by Stop-n-Pop on Jun 5, 2009 9:57 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
One Possibility
Would be to give away 18 along with Mad Dog which would clear about 4 million dollars in Raw Cap Space. This would get the Wolves around 7 Million under the cap. The benefit for this would be the ability go over the MLE to limit the Market for Childress. Giving away Gomes instead of Madsen clears even more money. I see Toronto as a potential team to target for such a trade. Although their need for 2-3’s is so great- Childress so be their number 1 FA priority.
by Jose Cordoba on Jun 6, 2009 10:30 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
I like it.
What if the Wolves don’t take Curry but take Harden, Evans, or DeRozan? I would imagine that 18 would likely be that PG pick?
by Krotz the Wall on Jun 5, 2009 9:56 AM CDT reply actions 0 recs
Hinrich..
….gives them some flexibility at the point; enough so where Harden would definitely work. I’m not sure about Evans or Derozan. This thing hinges on getting Harden or Curry at #6.
The World's Leading Exporter of Small Area Quickness
www.canishoopus.com
by Stop-n-Pop on Jun 5, 2009 9:58 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Which seems reasonable--especially Curry.
Harden’s stock seems to be rising significantly lately, so he might be gone by 6. I don’t think anyone else will take Curry earlier than us, though. Does anyone else view him as a top 5 talent?
Griffin
Rubio
Harden
Thabeet (maybe, we’ll see if he hurts his prospects during visits)
That leaves Curry, Derozan (who somebody will love and think he’s the next VC), Evans (again, somebody might love—even us!), Hill, and Holiday. My guess is that Thabeet will slip, and some team(s) will fall in love with Hill or Derozan or Evans and take them early. I think Harden goes top 3, maybe even #2, leaving sweet Curry for us.
"Come on Eddie, let's get serious."
by biggity2bit on Jun 5, 2009 10:04 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
I don't agree that this scenario wouldn't work with other players.
I think an Evans Hinrich backcourt would cause nightmare matchups for the other team with their length, and Hinrich handles the PG duties well enough that I think he could play with DeRozan also.
In other words, I think this deal could work with any number of potential backcourt pairings from the draft. I have also continually expressed my concern with Curry, so I would prefer someone else.
Good thoughts and work on this overall!
by mnjayhawk on Jun 5, 2009 10:47 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Pure genius
in it’s elegance, simplicity, and realism.
I like the idea of adding Koufos, mostly because I like saying “Koufos.” But also because if AlJeff isn’t full-strength, there would be a capable guy to spell him. And, if you want to revisit CP3/DWill/Rondo PG trade fantasies, a healthy AlJeff would offer the age/skill/contract that could entice other teams to swap a superstar to the Wolves.
by PoorDick on Jun 5, 2009 10:11 AM CDT reply actions 0 recs
Danke..
…and I agree: Koufos is fun to say. ;)
The World's Leading Exporter of Small Area Quickness
www.canishoopus.com
by Stop-n-Pop on Jun 5, 2009 10:17 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
I have numerous fantasies about dumping Al Jefferson, but I highly doubt we get a “superstar” player for him. Why? He is not a superstar, but his contract approaches the max. A team would have to give up a better player, in exchange for saving a few million dollars per year. The only way this happens is if a team has two redundant “superstar” players…I can’t think of a team out there with this problem…or a player at the end of his contract who wants out…and wants to play for the Wolves…not likely currently. Although, SNP’s proposal could do wonders to improving the attractiveness of the Wolves as a destination.
by DougW on Jun 5, 2009 10:21 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
His contract doesn't approach the max...
It’s about 75% of the max, which is $3-4 million per year. Using that rationale, teams would have to trade superstars for expirings and players on their rookie deals.
As for him not being a superstar player, I agree, but that’s not the point. Teams usually trade All-Stars for 75 cents on the dollar, if that. In that scenario, he’s a reasonable contract with a superstar-level skill (post scoring), which would be attractive to another team. For that matter, Love would be, too. If the Wolves wanted to trade for Chris Bosh and the Raps were shopping him, the Raps would seriously consider a package featuring Love (particularly since rumors have suggested a Beasley and others for Bosh swap).
by pagingstanleyroberts on Jun 5, 2009 10:30 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
I meant to say $3-4 million per year less than the max. For example, Jefferson makes about $4 million per year less than Bosh.
by pagingstanleyroberts on Jun 5, 2009 10:30 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
You seem to be essentially agreeing with me. $3-4 million under max is basically a max deal, and more or less a rounding error in the grand scheme of an entire teams payroll.
Then you cite Chris Bosh, which is exactly the type of tier two superstar type player I think we could get for Jefferson…an unhappy player approaching the end of his contract. But we need to get to the point where guys like him want to come here, or at least find it reasonably attractive.
by DougW on Jun 5, 2009 10:45 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
$3-4 million is not insignificant...
If a team is looking to cut salary. To call it a rounding error fails to recognize that teams will make trades to save that type of salary.
I also don’t think it’s out of the question that Jefferson could be traded for a guy like CP3 if the Hornets were shopping him. The whole point is that the other team needs to cut salary and wants to rebuild. The Sixers traded Iverson for Andre Miller and late first-round picks. KG went for Jefferson and role players. Barkley was traded for Jeff Hornacek and role players. Teams never trade superstars for other superstars, and Jefferson would arguably have more value now if healthy than he did when traded for KG.
by pagingstanleyroberts on Jun 5, 2009 11:14 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Yes, I should have made that more clear
I don’t think AlJeff would be swapped even-up, but instead as part of a package (much like how the Wolves got him in the first place!).
by PoorDick on Jun 5, 2009 10:43 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Agreed then. We take a bad contract and/or give up a pick or promising young player and we could be talking. I’d be all over that, with all my fingers and toes crossed.
by DougW on Jun 5, 2009 10:47 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Is there a potential stumbling block...
Because Kirilenko plays for a team within the division? I know the Wolves and Jazz aren’t rivals, but it’s not clear whether this would preclude a deal from the Jazz end. Plus, the reports out of Utah suggest that the Jazz will keep Kirilenko and make a choice between Millsap and Boozer. I also assume that if Okur opts out and leaves, the Jazz would keep Kirilenko in that scenario. I don’t know how many of these things are true, just playing devil’s advocate because this seems less plausible than the Hinrich/Miller swap (which is also contingent on the Bulls wanting to re-sign Ben Gordon and being able to do so).
by pagingstanleyroberts on Jun 5, 2009 10:33 AM CDT reply actions 0 recs
Agreed..
…the Jazz are in for a turbulent off season and they may simply hang on to Kirilinko because they could lose 2 or 3 big time players. This would definitely depend on what they want to do with the guy. They have asked him to put on weight so I guess they have him pegged for a backup 3/4. That’s still an awful lot to pay a guy for a backup and with Smith (a backup 4) + the future pick, I hope it would be enough to swing the deal.
The World's Leading Exporter of Small Area Quickness
www.canishoopus.com
by Stop-n-Pop on Jun 5, 2009 10:58 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Good points. Personally, I don’t think Okur will opt out and would at least be more likely to stay than Boozer. It’s surprising they haven’t traded Kirilenko yet; Jerry Sloan obviously doesn’t like him and they could’ve easily swapped him for Shawn Marion a few years ago.
by pagingstanleyroberts on Jun 5, 2009 11:16 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
grass is greener
The viability of this trade seems to hinge on one’s opinion of Hinrich and Kirilenko. Both of these players were seen as key on their teams a couple of years ago. Neither would be missed if they disappeared from those respective rosters tomorrow. Posters also seem to be in a hurry to dump Miller to anyone who would take him. That’s because he hasn’t played out like the Wolves’ hoped. I see Hinrich and Kirilenko as being next year’s Miller. What makes any of you so sure they wouldn’t be high-cost mediocre additions?
by ogishkemuncie on Jun 5, 2009 10:47 AM CDT reply actions 0 recs
That is the beauty. . .
. . .of the discussion, we don’t know. OTOH, what if AK47 and Hinrich play like they did 2/3 years ago when they were “better” players than now? You just don’t know what moves (or non-moves) will pay off. That is the chance you take, no matter what you do in life.
Sometimes the obvious is hidden.
by frankenhoops on Jun 5, 2009 3:50 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Like Mike Miller coming here last year.
Could be good, could be bad.
"Come on Eddie, let's get serious."
by biggity2bit on Jun 5, 2009 4:11 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Mike Miller's a completely different case
He had acted like one type of player his entire career, and changed it up his first day in Minnesota. That’s quite a bit different from hoping two guys can regain a groove from 2006-2007.
by McCleak on Jun 6, 2009 4:41 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
There's another yin-yang thing
about adding AK and Hinrich to the line-up. Yes, it’s like $22 mil or something tied up in two guys in their late 20s. But it also makes young teams like OKC and Portland decide if they want to stay on the “develop young core” tack, or try to catch up to the Wolves moves. And it puts Minnesota in 6-8 seed range in the West, without completely cancelling out another run in, say, 2012 (when Kevin Love and Curry/Harden would be about 23 or so!).
by PoorDick on Jun 5, 2009 10:49 AM CDT reply actions 0 recs
Yep..
…this thing is still dependent on the core developing together and all hitting that next level in 2-3 years when Love and Curry/Harden are 23 and Big Al is (hopefully) entering his prime. This approach makes them good now while not sacrificing any flexibility down the road…and hopefully bringing along a bunch of young talent for the ride.
The World's Leading Exporter of Small Area Quickness
www.canishoopus.com
by Stop-n-Pop on Jun 5, 2009 11:00 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Because Miller is and always has been a terrible defender, while both Hinrich and AK-47 have consistently been mentioned as being among the best defenders at their relative positions. Overpaid gunners are a dime a dozen and Miller’s biggest asset is his expiring contract.
by DougW on Jun 5, 2009 10:51 AM CDT reply actions 0 recs
Like it...
Not wild about Williams/Koufos filling out the 4/5 rotation minutes, but everything else looks good.
BTW…absolutely NO WAY do I want Austin Daye. Did you hear about his results at the Combine? From Chad Ford in a chat two days ago:
“He couldn’t bench the 185 bar one time. He had just a 28 inch vertical jump and poor scores on the speed and agility testing.”
He couldn’t put the bar up once…NOT ONCE! Steph Curry put it up 10 times (which apparently impressed everybody). Daye’s basketball skills are questionable enough already, but he will get physically destroyed in the NBA. He never should have come out this year.
"I'm gonna make you cry...I'm gonna make you cry and dip my cookie in your tears!!!"
by mutleyil on Jun 5, 2009 10:57 AM CDT reply actions 0 recs
I don't worry about the bench (Durant couldn't lift it either)...
…but the slowness and lack of jumping ability are kind of worrisome. He’s long enough to make up for some of that but he’s not that great of an athlete….relatively speaking for an NBA player. He’s an absurd athlete in the grand scheme of things.
The World's Leading Exporter of Small Area Quickness
www.canishoopus.com
by Stop-n-Pop on Jun 5, 2009 11:02 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
I wonder if the moment when Steph Curry sat down on the bench was similar to when Susan Boyle walked out onto the stage and everyone was holding back chuckles and waiting for the trainwreck, then BAM!
by Xand1 on Jun 5, 2009 12:20 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Does AK47 have any game left?
I’ve watched Utah a fair amount in the past few years, and he looks pretty mediocre—I guess I wouldn’t get too excited about adding him. I like Hinrich as a solid point guard option, though.
Two trade possibilites that I would like are to go after Eric Gordon, by agreeing to take back Z-Bo. (I posted this a while back). Or, a Reverse Pritch Slap of sorts, where we dupe the Blazers into trading up for Steph Curry and have them send us Bayless and Pryzbilla for Craig Smith and Brian Cardinal. I doubt Portland would do that, but you never know. There was a report today that they might be interested in trading up for Curry.
by Andy G on Jun 5, 2009 11:01 AM CDT reply actions 0 recs
AK...
…has lots of game left. I’ll do a run-down post on him in the future but he’s wildly misused in Utah.
The World's Leading Exporter of Small Area Quickness
www.canishoopus.com
by Stop-n-Pop on Jun 5, 2009 11:02 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Ya
He seems like the kind of guy who would do really well with a change of scenery and a change of coaches/playing style.
"Come on Eddie, let's get serious."
by biggity2bit on Jun 5, 2009 11:30 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Who here among us..
….does not enjoy a good pig feeding while on a jet ski?
The World's Leading Exporter of Small Area Quickness
www.canishoopus.com
by Stop-n-Pop on Jun 5, 2009 1:42 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
I think he's found the next new AgriCraze:
Hydroponic Hog Farms.
by PoorDick on Jun 5, 2009 1:51 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Mmmmmm....
….pig slurry. If only there were a way for Midwestern congressmen to bring home the bacon on this project or for us to put more of our food supply into our gas tanks, it would have a chance of success.
The World's Leading Exporter of Small Area Quickness
www.canishoopus.com
by Stop-n-Pop on Jun 5, 2009 1:56 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
His Points Against Numbers and Plus/Minus Numbers are Insane
I wondered the same thing until I saw the numbers more in depth.
by Jose Cordoba on Jun 6, 2009 10:13 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Not clear
Jose, can you clarify this?
by artreddin on Jun 8, 2009 7:22 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Yes
When AK 47 is on the court- he outscores the opposing Small Forward at the rate of 8 Points Per 48 Minute. A lot of this might have to do with the fact that Utah gets carved up on the Interior.
Also when’s he on the court- The Jazz are 8.1 Points Per 48 Minutes better than when he is off the court.
Biggity Refers to some really helpful stats further down. Regarding total production at the 3 and 4 in relationship to PER.
Transalation: He’s a very solid starting 3 in the league.
by Jose Cordoba on Jun 8, 2009 7:39 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
nice numbers but
… does this not tell us more about the Jazz than about AK himself? And why are his minutes limited if he has this kind of impact?
by artreddin on Jun 11, 2009 1:40 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Ok, Maybe I'm missing something
But currently the Wolves have $50.7 Million in contracts committed to 2009-10. Collins, Howard, and Ollie are all UFA’s who are off the books with no cap holds. The options to both Williams and Carney were not picked up. In my understanding, and I could be wrong, Rookie players selected in the draft do not become cap holds until they actually sign their contract. Theirfore if the #6 pick is scheduled to make $3 Million in year 1, that number doesn’t count against our cap figure until he puts his John Hancock on the dotted line.
If this is the case, and the cap gets put at, let’s say $59 Million. That means the wolves will be $8.3 Million under the cap before signing their rookies. With 15% raises in a contract allowed, this means we should be able to offer $2 + million more than the MLE in year 1 of a contract. As so few teams this year, I think it’s 3 or 4 have the cap space to go above the MLE, doesn’t this put us in a stronger postiion to make a run at a guy like Varajeao or Gortat or Sessions, or one any number of guys who want more than the MLE.
by Ebomb on Jun 5, 2009 11:02 AM CDT reply actions 0 recs
Then we aren't hamstrung long term
Taking on a guy like AK47?
by Ebomb on Jun 5, 2009 11:03 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Not at all...
…he only has 2 years left and it would end up being cheaper in the long run than signing someone like Joe Johnson to a huge 4 or 5 year deal. They wouldn’t be able to do much in 2010 but, I figure they weren’t going to be contenders for some of the better players anyway so they may push their free agent chips into a future off-season like 11 or 12….when they’re a better team and a more attractive destination.
The World's Leading Exporter of Small Area Quickness
www.canishoopus.com
by Stop-n-Pop on Jun 5, 2009 11:07 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Plus
As noted earlier, by trying to players in FA in ‘11 or ’12, we’ll hopefully be a more attractive option as Love, Harden/Curry, and Big Al are all coming into their own or entering their primes. I like the approach SnP outlines here because it is fundamentally centered on raising the talent level of the team without hamstringing ourselves in the short term future precisely so that we can be players for that one last FA that we need in ’11 or ’12 (assuming all goes as planned). Short of a guy like CP3 or Wade, no FA this year is going to make enough of a difference, and I think adding a contract like that for so long puts us back in KG land—kind of playoff contenders but too hamstrung to really go deep.
"Come on Eddie, let's get serious."
by biggity2bit on Jun 5, 2009 11:34 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Yep..
….the hope with this is that they a) become good right away, b) they develop a core of 3 players (Love, Jefferson, and Curry) that will all be 23 (Love), 24 (Curry), and 27 (Jefferson) in 3 years, and c) that they will be good enough then (and until then) to attract a big name free agent when Kirilenko’s money comes off the books. They also will have 3 years to develop Young, Koufos, and Beaubois….possibly bringing over Pekovic while they’re at it to fill the Sheldon Williams minutes. They could then max a guy out in the post-11 off season while still being able to re-sign their core players and develop the bench talent.
The World's Leading Exporter of Small Area Quickness
www.canishoopus.com
by Stop-n-Pop on Jun 5, 2009 11:44 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Deviously brilliant.
"Come on Eddie, let's get serious."
by biggity2bit on Jun 5, 2009 11:49 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
That's a good question...
…and one that I wasn’t completely sure of so I went with the more conservative route. I think that because the rookie contracts are slotted, they count from the moment of the draft. I am not sure of the time line on this but I think it all happens before the one week cooling period before free agency. Either that or it happens before the July reset. Again, I’m not 100% sure and I went with the conservative estimate. Anyone else know about this?
The World's Leading Exporter of Small Area Quickness
www.canishoopus.com
by Stop-n-Pop on Jun 5, 2009 11:05 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Ok, I think I found the answer
“Unsigned first round picks are included in team salary immediately upon their selection in the draft. They count as 100% of the scale salary for that pick, unless there is a verbal agreement for a higher salary.”
The holds for our picks are
- - $2.474 Million
- - $1.198 Million
- - $.836 Million
Total Cap Hold of $4.509 Million meaning we are committed to $55.2 Million, making your statements all the more corred :)
by Ebomb on Jun 5, 2009 11:21 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Excellent...
..thanks for finding that.
The World's Leading Exporter of Small Area Quickness
www.canishoopus.com
by Stop-n-Pop on Jun 5, 2009 11:45 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
ARIZA MAYN
Ariza mayn Ariza mayn Ariza mayn Ariza mayn
MAYN HOL UP!
by MAYNHOLUP on Jun 5, 2009 11:07 AM CDT reply actions 0 recs
He's not leaving LA
I’d love to have him but he grew up about a mile from the arena, went to UCLA, and they will use the money from Odom’s expiring deal to bring him back. He’s going to be very good.
The World's Leading Exporter of Small Area Quickness
www.canishoopus.com
by Stop-n-Pop on Jun 5, 2009 11:08 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
It will be interesting to see what Odom does
If he wants to win more rings, he could sign for the MLE (if they still have it; I’m not completely familiar with the Lakers’ payroll) and the remaining money could be used to give Ariza a raise.
The World's Leading Exporter of Small Area Quickness
www.canishoopus.com
by Stop-n-Pop on Jun 5, 2009 11:09 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
f**** mayn!!!
i want Ariza so bad mayn PAUSE
MAYN HOL UP!
by MAYNHOLUP on Jun 5, 2009 11:10 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
less juss give him 45 mil mayn
he’d have a hard time trunin dat down
MAYN HOL UP!
by MAYNHOLUP on Jun 5, 2009 11:11 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
de boi TOO thowed
i say we throw all de money we have at him, but dass juss me mayn
MAYN HOL UP!
by MAYNHOLUP on Jun 5, 2009 11:07 AM CDT reply actions 0 recs
Utah is getting max value for Kirilenko in that trade
I think Kirilenko is worth more to us than he is to Utah. I would try to make that trade without giving up a #1. You know what I’m saying? It’s the “shopping for a car” thing. Don’t offer your final deal as your opening offer.
by Dave T on Jun 5, 2009 11:18 AM CDT reply actions 0 recs
I agree.
But on the other hand, if they hold onto him for another year, his contract becomes very valuable. I don’t know why they’re holding onto him from a personnel standpoint, but it makes sense financially if the Jazz aren’t in financial trouble (which I doubt because they don’t seem to have attendance problems).
by pagingstanleyroberts on Jun 5, 2009 11:21 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
FA Players in 2011 and 2012
Does not excite me at all. Currently over 17 Teams are going to have room under the cap in 09-10 to sign a max free agent with at least 7 of those teams likely able to sign 2 max free agents. No way all this space gets used as although the FA class in 09-10 is very top heavy, the depth to me doesn’t indicate that even half of all this cap space is going to be used. What good does it do for us to have cap space in 2011 or 2012 when just like 2010 we have to compete with 10 other teams for players.
by Ebomb on Jun 5, 2009 11:43 AM CDT reply actions 0 recs
Don't forget...
…that there will likely be a new CBA by then. Also, not all of those teams will have that much room in July of the year it matters. Between picks and re-signings, a lot of that money will come off the books.
The World's Leading Exporter of Small Area Quickness
www.canishoopus.com
by Stop-n-Pop on Jun 5, 2009 11:47 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
French majors . . .
Is Beaubois’s name is pronounced “bo-BWAH?”
by PoorDick on Jun 5, 2009 11:51 AM CDT reply actions 0 recs
never thought majoring in French would get a call-out here
but yes it is indeed pronounced “bo-BWAH” and I am definitely sold on taking him at 28 and stashing him for a year or two abroad
by jor the frenchie on Jun 5, 2009 12:06 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Thanks--I agree
I bet your parents were happy when they asked, “what are you going to do when you get out of college?” and you replied, “I’m going to enter the high-paying world of FRENCH!”
Or should I say, “Je vais gagner un bon nombre d’argent en français.”
by PoorDick on Jun 5, 2009 12:12 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Then would it be...
…bo-BWAH to Kou-FIS for the slam?
The World's Leading Exporter of Small Area Quickness
www.canishoopus.com
by Stop-n-Pop on Jun 5, 2009 12:34 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
This is well done; a few random thoughts
I’m lukewarm about Kirilenko at 34 million over the next 2 years. It’s an interesting set of suggestions, and I think Utah would be interested from a financial viewpoint.
Frankly, I’d rather try for Childress and not do the Kirilenko trade, but either might work.
It’s still an undersized backcourt, though Heinrich’s good defense helps mitigate that.
Would this course of action make the Wolves the whitest team in the league? Love, Heinrich, Kirilenko with major roles?
Not sure I would resign Williams in this set of manouvers. Maybe, but I would want to see if Koufas was ready to play 20 minutes a night. Not sure what WIlliams brings.
by Eric in Madison on Jun 5, 2009 11:54 AM CDT reply actions 0 recs
I agree about Kirilenko...
… for the past two seasons he hasn’t looked like the player he was supposed to become. He flashed some nice potential early in his career and has never lived up to it. Not only has he been mediocre; I’d say he’s been pretty disappointing/bad. He hasn’t looked like the kind of guy I’d want to commit big money to over the next couple of years. I think he’s redundant with Brewer, anyway, as both have essentially the same strengths and weaknesses, though AK is obviously a better shotblocker. I’d pass on the Utah deal.
by Shogun on Jun 5, 2009 12:17 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
I don't know
Kirilenko had off years in ‘06-07 and 07-08, but still was a solid player. I think he’d be an upgrade over whatever we ran out there last year.
In 7 seasons Kirilenko has posted a PER of 17+ five times, with last season coming in at 16.82. Between Gomes, Carney, and Miller, the average PER was 12.84. Plus Kirilenko’s defense was better than any of those three.
If go over to 82games.com, Kirilenko was the second most valuable Jazz player (by Roland Rating) at +4.8 (.1 behind Boozer). That would also place him second on the Wolves behind Big Al’s +5.3 (Roland rating is an assessment of who’s a difference maker on a team).
Furthermore, comparing SF PER between the Wolves and the Jazz (I know this incorporates more than Kirilenko, but I still think it is telling):
Team Opp. Net FTA
Wolves 13.4 17.6 -4.2 2.7
Jazz 18.6 16.2 2.5 6.0
Kirilenko is not going to be a superstar in the NBA, that much is clear. What is also clear, though, is that he is a productive player on both ends of the court, and is far superior to anything the Wolves can trot out. Adding in the fact that he could play some 4 as well (think defensively), and plays a different game than Al or Love, and he becomes very valuable to the Wolves.
Lastly, I would be ecstatic if Brewer ever approached the kind of production Kirilenko has averaged over his career. At this point I’d take Kirilenko over Brewer any day. Brewer has proven nothing yet in the league, except maybe that he’s a good defender off the bench. That’s the reality of it. I don’t think anyone’s holding their breath that he’ll ever learn how to shoot, and until he can show that he can do more than defend, Kirilenko is the superior option if we can get him.
"Come on Eddie, let's get serious."
by biggity2bit on Jun 5, 2009 2:07 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Don't overpay for role players...
… is something everyone here was saying a few weeks ago about Chris Kaman. I feel that if you were making that argument then, you have to stick to it now regarding Kirilenko. I don’t dispute that AK used to be a decent-to-good player, but I wouldn’t want to inherit two more years of his contract if he keeps declining. I don’t hate Kirilenko, but I wouldn’t be designing my “Building a Winner” strategy around him. That’s all I’m saying. Especially when you already have Corey Brewer for 1/10 of the cost.
by Shogun on Jun 5, 2009 4:14 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Yeah, there’s not a whole lot to get excited about with AK47, that I can see. I think he’s a homeless man’s version of Josh Smith and Josh Smith isn’t even enough to get the Wolves into contender-mode.
This isn’t a good off-season to improve a rebuilding roster. It’s a weak draft and free agent class. The ‘08 Draft was a much better chance to make serious strides. Why didn’t we fire McHale before that?!
by Andy G on Jun 5, 2009 4:33 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Which would you rather have
Kirilenko or Miller (Twolves edition)?
"Come on Eddie, let's get serious."
by biggity2bit on Jun 5, 2009 4:36 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Miller....
… with a year less to go on his contract.
by Shogun on Jun 5, 2009 4:50 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Agreed
But even more than South Dakota Mike, I’d rather have OJ & Marko.
by Andy G on Jun 5, 2009 5:02 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
'ells no!
08 version of Mike is leagues better then Marko, and Love out played Mayo last year, and will continue to do so. that trade moved this franchise forwar about 2 years of rebuilding. McHale still ahd to be relieved from the FO, but that trade was absolutely the right thing for this franchise.
the only thing to like about Marko is his Wife, and while he was with the team she had a reason to visit our state on a semi regular basis.
Will the Real Thor Please Stand Up ... ?
by the Real Thor on Jun 5, 2009 11:24 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Here's where I'm coming from on this:
You don’t buy AK47 for the long haul. You buy him and Hinrich so that your core of Curry or Harden, Love, and Jefferson can start to win now, have experience winning, and then hopefully develop all together so that when Kirilenko clears the books after 2011, you can sign a guy who wants to come to a team with a core of players aged from anywhere between 22 and 27. That’s $17 mil to fill out a promising core entering what will hopefully be their prime. Hinrich clears the books the following year. In the mean time, they win, play better defense, and are competitive. Hopefully, they even get a chance at the playoffs in one of the 2 years. That’s what you buy the guy for. You get solid production of a big name free agent for 2 years without having to pay the back end of a 4-5 year contract for someone like Joe Johnson, Josh Howard, or Michael Redd in 2010. Kirilenko is only expensive if you look at the first 2 years. He’ll still likely produce during that time. Guys like Johnson, Howard, and Redd all could be useless by the last 2 years in their big deal….with a core that hasn’t developed. There is a lot of flexibility that taking on a contract like this gives a developing team like the Wolves.
The World's Leading Exporter of Small Area Quickness
www.canishoopus.com
by Stop-n-Pop on Jun 5, 2009 5:36 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
I vote for SnP to be right hand man to Rob Moor
I hope he sees this site…
by timmuggs on Jun 5, 2009 8:42 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
You're right...
…they would probably make Dime Mag’s white issue. ;)
The World's Leading Exporter of Small Area Quickness
www.canishoopus.com
by Stop-n-Pop on Jun 5, 2009 12:36 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Question for SnP
You’ve been talking also about using a lot of the Wolves assets to get the 5th pick from Washington. On the off-chance that you could get it for Miller and 18, would prefer that + the Kirilenko deal to the Heinrich +Kirilenko suggestion you write about here?
by Eric in Madison on Jun 5, 2009 11:57 AM CDT reply actions 0 recs
If they could turn it into...
…Harden + Curry, yes. Otherwise, I think it’s not as attractive of an option.
The World's Leading Exporter of Small Area Quickness
www.canishoopus.com
by Stop-n-Pop on Jun 5, 2009 12:37 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
I agree
It’s only possibly better if you could get Harden with that pick. That’s not looking too likely right now.
by Eric in Madison on Jun 5, 2009 12:39 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Other positives of your proposal
1. The Wolves FO can demonstrate that they really want to improve the team, without locking into, say, a Chris Bosh for $120 million right before a new CBA hits (see Garnett, Kevin).
2. Shoddy has more a-holishness in his little finger than this entire roster has from head to toe. These are good guys, whom the fans will warm to quicker and deeper than say, the Nuggets (all wins being equal). The marketing dept.‘s job will be made a little easier.
3. The new investment in big men provides serviceable, young back-ups, but the time and money is low enough that if a sensible one becomes available in the draft/FA/trade/Pekovich, the reaction won’t be OMG WE AwREADY HAZ A GUY LIKE THAT
Relative Weaknesses: The defense of the starters (although they will be better than casual observers would guess), and the offense of the bench. But I’ll take it.
by PoorDick on Jun 5, 2009 12:01 PM CDT reply actions 0 recs
Defense
Will it be that bad?
Assuming you had Hinrich and Kirilenko at the 1/2 and the 3, the perimeter D would be very much improved (+ Brewer off the bench). That should improve the defense of Al and Love (don’t forget moving Kirilenko to the 4, with Brewer at the 2 or 3 if necessary). Point is that adding these two players (or swap in Childress if you like) will make the interior D better by diminishing victimization opportunities and through (ostensibly) forcing offensive players to play into the hands of the interior D (see: Houston Rockets team approach on Kobe).
As a list of individual defenders, maybe not too good outside of 2-3 guys. As a team, though, much much better. I’d take my chances with those guys.
"Come on Eddie, let's get serious."
by biggity2bit on Jun 5, 2009 12:09 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
You're right
But as much as I like Curry, I don’t think he’ll be a clamp-down defender. With Harden added to Hinrich and AK, the size will definitely be there—just not quickness. Again, it’s relative, and I’ll gladly take it, as you point out that it may not be perfect, but it’s much better than what we’re used to.
by PoorDick on Jun 5, 2009 12:15 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
I see improvement...
on both of your questions, PD. Both Hinrich and AK are better defenders than we had with last season’s matadors. Plus, AK’s length and weak-side help abilities will help cover for Big Al and K-Love’s basket-protecting shortcomings.
As far as bench scoring goes, granted, we don’t have a player that’s gonna remind anybody of Jason Terry. But, Gomes proved he could fill the basket on several occasions last year and Bassy has been improving. The key is that they will be playing against other subs. As starters, they were borderline at best, but as reserves, I’ll but their talent up against at least 85% of other reserves in the league.
by SoDakHmr on Jun 5, 2009 12:36 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Good points
although I’ll believe that the 2nd team as a whole can put up points when I see it.
Another lesser-considered advantage of having a team like the one mentioned above: No, there is not a “go-to” guy on the starting five. But each of the five can put up 20 on any given night, and I think eventually AlJeff and Harden/Curry would be able to do it consistently.
Also—a smart, skilled offense (which I believe this would be) forces defenses to expend energy that would otherwise be used on offense during the game. Especially during all those games we saw last year where the Wolves would keep it close for three of the four quarters, but be on the wrong end of a 32-8 scoring disadvantage for a particular period.
by PoorDick on Jun 5, 2009 12:47 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Ok, I see what you're saying...
and am in 100% agreement. This would be a team that the fans would love and every other team would hate to play – I like that!
by SoDakHmr on Jun 5, 2009 1:25 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
The Wolves would be Old School
to the core. Norman Dale would be the perfect coach.

by PoorDick on Jun 5, 2009 1:30 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
And the perfect crunch-time play
would be “The Picket Fence.”
by PoorDick on Jun 5, 2009 1:32 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
You're right.
But Shooter would turn down the coaching job because Rob Moor wants too much control.
by PoorDick on Jun 5, 2009 6:18 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
RE: smart skilled offense…I’d say it might have the potential to be that.
Jefferson needs to show that he can make teammates better, or at the very least not make them worse, which is what he’s done since he arrived. No more shooting every time you catch the ball, even if there are three guys on you and you are at a bad angle.
by DougW on Jun 5, 2009 2:00 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
My guess/hope
is that if he had teammates with the credibility and reliability to demand the kick-out, AlJeff would indeed pass them the ball. Other than Pierce and maybe Miller, he’s never played with someone as least as old, and with any skills.
by PoorDick on Jun 5, 2009 2:32 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
That starting line up could be fun to watch on offense
The strength of that team would be that there would be no weak link on offense. (Although, I guess it would be nice to have perimeter players who shot the 3 pointer a little better than Ak47 or Hinrich.) It seems like a team that could use a lot of ball movement pretty well. Almost every player would be a good passer(except Jefferson who made progress this year as a distributor). So, with the right coaching and court savvy, they could attack the weakest defender on the court at a given time, which is always a good way to work.
Then there’s the added bonus of Hinrich and AK47 being two way players. It would be nice to have Foye around and still get AK47, so Foye could come off the bench and score points when the team went through a cold spell.(something that may become a problem if Jefferson needs to take most of the season to heal) However, there’s also the danger of the new coach starting Foye along with Hinrich if we keep Foye, so it might be best to give Utah an exciting player in exchange for their overpaid bench player.
Another risk comes if we draft Tyreke Evans. He would not fit into the ball movement offense at all. If we do draft Tyreke Evans, the team might want to structure itself around the dribble drive system he’d thrive in, and fans would have to accept that some offensive possessions would end in annoyingly bad shots. Might be silly to shape an off season around one risky bet of a draft pick. But, the chances of the risk paying off brilliantly would partly depend on a willingness to accommodate for his strengths and weaknesses. So, if it’s the bet the wolves take, they might need to invest in lowering the risk of him becoming a bust, if that makes any sense.
In any case, I would be thrilled to watch something like that line up next year.
by oblivionspocket on Jun 5, 2009 2:00 PM CDT reply actions 0 recs
One other positive...
About the Hinrich / Kirilenko scenario. Neither one of them would ever bitch about how cold the Minnesota winter is. I think Hinrich grew up in Iowa, and AK is from freaking Russia.
Don’t underestimate this…the weather is one of the reason’s it can be so hard to lure Free Agents here. Stocking up on good players that know how to properly enjoy a cold winter is a positive.
"I'm gonna make you cry...I'm gonna make you cry and dip my cookie in your tears!!!"
by mutleyil on Jun 5, 2009 3:52 PM CDT reply actions 0 recs
It's a nice deal SnP
And let’s not forget our 2nd rounders either.
Always a diamond in the rough…..
by Auswolf on Jun 5, 2009 5:47 PM CDT reply actions 0 recs
Ingles...
…in the 2nd!
The World's Leading Exporter of Small Area Quickness
www.canishoopus.com
by Stop-n-Pop on Jun 5, 2009 5:49 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Read my mind!
Wouldn’t be a bad use of pick 45 at all
He can shoot can Jingles, but has the physique of Corey Brewer.
by Auswolf on Jun 5, 2009 9:06 PM CDT reply actions 0 recs
Is Kirk necessary?
I think it’s imperative that Curry is paired with a big 2-guard to take full advantage of his gifts and allow him to play off the ball at times on offense. If Curry is paired with Hinrich, they’d put the smaller defender on Kirk and have bigger, more athletic defenders on Curry. Since Curry doesn’t have the first step to get by these guys, he’d struggle more to get his jumper off on them. Opposing teams couldn’t get away with this if he’s paired with Miller. Ideally, Brewer would develop enough of an offensive game that he could play this role. That way you wouldn’t be giving anything up on defense either. But I guess you kind of pick your poison with these scenarios. The bottom-line is that I think a Curry-Miller backcourt gives you more in terms of offense and rebounding than what you’d gain with Hinrich’s improved defense. And don’t forget, Hinrich came off the bench last year. His prior year as the starting PG was not nearly as stellar.
I’m nit picking here….overall great post and I like the cap flexibility to do a reset only a couple years out. I’m just wondering if less is more in this case. Do the Kirilenko piece and leave everything else alone.
by Rascal Flatts on Jun 5, 2009 9:13 PM CDT reply actions 0 recs
With the way Miller...
….fashions himself as Magic 2.0, I think it would work on offense. Hinrich would be more of a help on defense while taking more pressure off of Curry or Harden on both ends of the court. I do think a Miller/Curry back court would work like gang busters on offense. You raise an interesting question: Do they gain more on offense and rebounding with Miller than they would gain in defense from Hinrich? I don’t know. I think Hinrich gives them a guy that can guard 3 positions with proficiency and share the ball handling duties where Miller can somewhat guard 2 positions and somewhat handle the ball.
I guess the part where I’d disagree is the stuff about Curry not being able to get off his shot. Curry is one of those guys who seems to play in slow motion. He’s very under control and the speed comes at moments when it’s to his advantage. His hesitation skill is off the charts. He should have even more space to operate in the NBA than he did in college. Also, the guy can flat out handle the ball:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FSXcgSrtu5Y
I think that little clip is a good representation of his handle, court vision, and hesitation skill. BTW: That’s Austin Daye looking stupid on the cross over. It’s not about how much speed you have, but when you use it.
The World's Leading Exporter of Small Area Quickness
www.canishoopus.com
by Stop-n-Pop on Jun 5, 2009 9:29 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
His catch and shoot
isn’t too bad, either (watch for a special guest in attendance).
Assuming he can play in the NBA, Curry will get more nightly highlight footage than any other rookie other than Rubio (assuming he comes over and stays over). If Harden’s gone at the sixth pick, there shouldn’t even be a moment of hesitation. You pick Curry, and state sincerely how happy you are to have him. Then you wait for the phone to ring and see who wanted him even more, and what they’re willing to offer (a la the Mayo pick). IF something amazing comes along, you consider it. If not, you start the ROY campaign for Curry on Opening Night.
For all of the concern people have over Curry’s supposed inability to play defense, it should be noted that the two most enthralling young PGs in the playoffs this year were Rose and Rondo, neither of whom exactly locked the other one down on defense. Very few talanted youngsters ever learn to play proper defense on the way up, and why should they? The points get the glory, and the stars are usually so much better than the competition that they can save their energy for offense.
by PoorDick on Jun 5, 2009 11:45 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Hinrich
I think you’re overstating Hinrich’s defensive flexibility. Three positions? Hinrich is barely longer than Randy Foye, I don’t see how he can consistently guard SF’s and some of the bigger SG’s in the league. They can just rise up and get their shot off against him or post him up. I do agree he has great lateral quicks and does a nice job staying in front of guys. That alone goes a long ways.
With the lineup you’ve constructed, Curry would have to be the #1B option, with Jefferson being 1A. That means the opposing team can take their biggest, baddest perimeter defender and put him on Curry while keeping a PG on Hinrich and the weaker defending wing on Kirilenko. Although Curry has an amazingly quick release and is sneaky quick, I just thing he’d be that much better if the opposing team’s PG were forced to guard him. Guys like Chris Paul, Jameer Nelson, DJ Augustin, and Aaaron Brooks are going to have a tough time chasing him through a bunch of screens and don’t have the length to close out in time to distract his sight line. Plus it forces these guys to expend energy on defense and perhaps get pancaked now and again by a Kevin Love screen.
Any combination of a Curry/Evans, Curry/Harden, Curry/Miller or Curry/better offensive version of Corey Brewer seems to make more sense, and costs less.
by Rascal Flatts on Jun 6, 2009 7:51 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
He wouldn't do it often...
…but he’s capable of guarding small forwards. He was on Pierce in the playoffs. As for the Curry stuff, I just don’t think he gets enough credit for being quick and crafty with the ball. I do admit that Curry/Harden would be a nice thing to see.
The World's Leading Exporter of Small Area Quickness
www.canishoopus.com
by Stop-n-Pop on Jun 6, 2009 8:22 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Excellent post!
I agree with the whole success path except for one thing; if both Love and Jefferson are healthy I don’t get how the minutes would be distributed at the 4 and the 5.
How would you do it?
4. Love (30), Williams (10), Koufos (8)
5. Jefferson (30), Williams (10), Koufos (8)
Something like that? Isn’t that too little minutes for our best two players?
Beater of the early Thabeet drum ... but not so much of the late one
by Wim (Belgium) on Jun 6, 2009 1:13 AM CDT reply actions 0 recs
Yeah..
….there would definitely need to be better distribution of the minutes. I just wanted to make sure there were 4 big men at the 4/5 to fill out the roster. My guess is that if something like this happened, Koufos would end up seeing more minutes. Either way, they basically take the place of Smith, Cardinal, and Collins’ minutes, and Love and Jefferson would need at least 35 mpg.
The World's Leading Exporter of Small Area Quickness
www.canishoopus.com
by Stop-n-Pop on Jun 6, 2009 6:31 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Hinrich for Miller
Here’s the thing. The Bulls won’t trade Hinrich for Miller for two reasons.
First, Hinrich is better than Miller
Second, they don’t need any expirings.
Third, the Bulls don’t need Miller—-at all.
On the other hand, the Wolves need Hinrich because there is no one in the draft that’s going to come out and be a starting PG for the Wolves. I.E., the only way Hinrich goes to the Wolves is a pick swap of #6 for #16. Basically, it would end up being something like Hinrich and T Williams (#16) for DeRozan (#6) Cardinal and Telfair. I think the trade value is fair in terms of talent with the edge going to Minny for one simple reason: There isn’t a lot of difference between #6 and #16 in terms of potential and/or impact.
Other than a pick swap, I don’t see the Bulls trading with Minny because I doubt they want to move Love or Jefferson.
by Leto on Jun 6, 2009 12:16 PM CDT reply actions 0 recs
I'm not sure about your other contentions
but it sounds like the Bulls must have at least considered trading Hinrich to the Wolves for expirings before the deadline.
Don’t you think that the Bulls would like to get rid of Hinrich sooner rather than later, so that they can sign Gordon, and maybe even be player in the 2010 Free Agent Frenzy?
by PoorDick on Jun 6, 2009 1:03 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
2010 is already secured
The Bulls already have enough 2010 expirings. I.E., that’s not going to give the Wolves any leverage. Prior to the deadline, it would have worked as leverage and was probably one of the things the Wolves were counting on/calling the Bulls’ bluff. But unless you plan on eating HInrich’s contract, there’s no way the Bulls can sign Gordon and remain under the tax. Further, cutting salary in a Hinrich trade does nothing to sign Gordon. For that reason, I think many bloggers are mistaken to think the Bulls are going to make trades that revolve around the assumption that Gordon will sign with them as long as the Bulls stay under the tax. I.E., Gordon is under no obligation to sign with anyone no matter if they have zero money on the books. The Bulls won’t take that kind of chance. What they will do is make their moves, if they’re going to, and worry about Gordon after July 1st.
I think there was a trade brewing with the Wolves at the deadline. I think they both parted company because the Bulls wanted a pick as well as expirings. The Wolves, I’m guessing, didn’t want to give up the pick so… both teams parted ways. Paxson did say that the deal would not have been sensible from a basketball standpoint but also said that doesn’t mean it couldn’t be re-visited in the future. I think he was talking about the summer. As an aside, that pick may have been the #18 at the time because the Bulls were looking for expirings, too. As of today, they don’t need any more 2010 expirings so that eleiminates that as a bargaining chip from Minny.
by Leto on Jun 6, 2009 1:33 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Got it
good information—thank you.
As an aside, I’m pounding the drum for a much bigger Wolves/Bulls trade:
Bulls get
Al Jefferson
Craig Smith
Mike Miller
2010 pick (18?)
Wolves get
Deng
Hinrich
Noah
Here’s my rationale: I think it makes both teams better, as I believe a healthy Jefferson is a better complement to Thomas than Noah is. It gets Deng off the books for the Bulls. The Bulls can use the pick to draft a Maynor-type back-up at 18. It adds a 2nd banana scorer in the low post (at a good contract for age and production), and still leaves lots of room for an All-Star addition (DWade?). It gives the Bulls another interior scorer off the bench in Smith, who also has a tiny, short contract.
Bulls start:
Rose/rookie PG
Gordon/M. Miller
Salmons/16th pick
Thomas/Smith
Jefferson/B. Miller
Wolves start:
Hinrich/Bassy/
Harden or Curry/Foye
Deng/Brewer
Love/Gomes
Noah/?
Reasonable from your perspective, or not? If so, what type of similar deal could you live with?
by PoorDick on Jun 6, 2009 2:26 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Yes, I think so
Yes, I think the Bulls might actually do that trade. Although, I’m not sure if they want to let Noah go. They’re pretty high on him. If they were sending Tyrus I know they’d do it. Either way, I think it’s a very fair trade.
by Leto on Jun 6, 2009 5:10 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Assuming a trade like this isn't reality
would you prefer the Bulls keep the core intact and try to add Bosh, or let Ben Gordon go, and make a run for DWade?
by PoorDick on Jun 7, 2009 12:09 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
I don't think the T-Wolves do this.
I think Hinrich can be acquired using expiring contracts, so you are essentially giving Big Al and the #18 for Deng and Noah. I think that is way to expensive. You can’t give up your best offensive threat that draws double and triple teams to get two role players.
Get Hinrich for expiring contracts, keep the rest of the roster intact and draft strategically.
by mnjayhawk on Jun 7, 2009 8:25 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Yes, you're right
about the cost of Al, as low-post scoring would go from a strength to a weakness in a hurry (although I think Love has proven he can pick up some of the slack).
But I think this is more about making the team better. Building through the draft is great, and economical, but assuming this year’s picks make an impact, by the time they’re in their prime (mid to late 20s) Hinrich will likely be out of the league (or at the most, a role player himself). Besides, there are better big men coming in the draft down the road (see Aldrich, Cole).
And as Leto put it so well above, I’m not sure Hinrich can be had for expiring contracts.
by PoorDick on Jun 7, 2009 9:13 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
You're right about Big Al. But...
I think you’re wrong that you can get Hinrich for expiring contracts. Essentially, you’re saying the Bulls will trade Hinrich for the 18th pick. I don’t see the Bulls doing that.
by Leto on Jun 7, 2009 4:43 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Maybe I should explain....
The primary reason the Bulls won’t trade Hinrich for expirings is because, as of right now, Ben Gordon is not a member of the Bulls. There is no way the Bulls would take the chance of dumping Hinrich and end up with neither Gordon nor Hinrich. Instead, they’d have Cardinal, Telfair and #18 (who won’t even be close to Hinch/Gordon).
by Leto on Jun 7, 2009 4:59 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
The Bulls salary cap situation is wild
if HoopsHype is to believed (one of wyn’s favorites!).
If the team wanted to, a year from now they could have just three salaries totaling $26m on the books:
Hinrich $9m
Deng $11.3m
Salmons $5.8m
Even throwing the team options at Rose ($5.m) and Noah ($3m), and giving Ty Thomas the qualifying offer ($6.2m) gets them to $40m, and of course any picks they sign this year and next. Between salary cap room, young players, and tradeable assets, this team could put two superstars on the roster, and still have a good core of starters and role players to boot.
by PoorDick on Jun 7, 2009 5:05 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
i dont want
hinrich or ak
Just draft smart
thats all im asking for
we actually gave up brandon roy after drafting him
it still hurts
by andrew33 on Jun 6, 2009 6:59 PM CDT reply actions 0 recs
I agree!
… and I’d take Curry over Harden for the simple reason of his being charismatic and having a tremendous upside. (Harden on the other hand ALWAYS shoots left and will get SWATTED… check it out on his 5 min. youtube promo esp. at 3:20) However, with Telfair and Curry that’s about the lightest backcourt in the history of the NBA! Harden and Evans deserve top ten draft status for their quickness and length… but we’re also missing the fact that they have that quickness with forty pounds more muscle on their frames. Something to think about when you’re running into brick walls like Rhino, Big Al or K-Love in practice. (As Foye to his misfortune found out.)
Lots of stats thrown around here but we’re missing Miller’s Wages of Wins assessment where he rates third in the league and above Kobe in WP48.
And, sorry to say it so bluntly, but you seem to be quite clueless about the luxury tax meltdown. No way, AK!
by artreddin on Jun 8, 2009 7:53 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
what...
….luxury tax meltdown are you talking about? i don’t know what that means.
The World's Leading Exporter of Small Area Quickness
www.canishoopus.com
by Stop-n-Pop on Jun 8, 2009 8:26 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
I think what he's referring to
Is David Stern coming out last week and stating that revenues for 09-10 are projected to be down 10%. Hollinger had a nice writeup on this, but essentially due to a claw back provision in the CBA, the cap is likely to go down 5-6 Million and the luxury tax level is likely to be below $60 Million if this occurs. It means that there will be fewer players for 2010 free agents, and that teams are going to further backed up against the tax.
His argument was that teams like Memphis and the Twolves who will be below the cap are going to be over more ideal. Essentially if the Tax level goes below 60 Million, only teams below the salary cap get to share in the luxury tax payments, and with more teams being over the threshold due to it decreasing by over 10 million dollars, those under the cap will reap some serious financial benefit.
The implications on the proposed AK47 deal is that taking us that close to what may be a lowered tax may be too great of risk financially for this club.
by Ebomb on Jun 8, 2009 2:29 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
I read that...
..as being contingent on which teams take the loan money because I think that counts towards the bottom line…but anyway, even if it doesn’t, the Wolves are at $59-63 mil in the 2 years Kirilenko is on the books…which is right around what they’d be if they keep the status quo in year one and probably right around where they’d want to be with a signed player in year two. Equally bluntly back at arteddin: it’s in the post and no one knows what the lux cap mark will be. Either way, the Wolves aren’t going to be in lux tax hell with this proposal. Not by a long shot…even if the cap is brought all the way down to $60 mil. Of course the incentive then becomes to sit on the cap space and cash the luxury checks, but there have also been rumors about the whole cap situation being rewritten by both the owners and the players because it could go haywire. The best approach here is to plan for it being 60-65 and that it will change no matter what in 2 years with a new CBA. I think this aspect of the meltdown is not being given its propers. The number isn’t known, there will be a new CBA, and there is a chance that the league could rework the cap before the new CBA. I don’t think that’s clueless.
The World's Leading Exporter of Small Area Quickness
www.canishoopus.com
by Stop-n-Pop on Jun 8, 2009 8:51 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Oops!
That last comment was respectfully made to SnP not you andrew33.
by artreddin on Jun 8, 2009 7:54 AM CDT reply actions 0 recs

by 


















