Minnesota Timberwolves trade Quentin Richardson to Miami Heat for Mark Blount
by PoohRubio on Aug 13, 2009 10:17 PM CDT
160 comments
From the PiPress:
Minnesota Timberwolves president David Kahn has traded shooting guard Quentin Richardson to the Miami Heat for former Timberwolves center Mark Blount, according to a person with knowledge of the situation. The deal was more about creating roster and salary cap flexibility than getting Blount, who likely won't be on the roster when Minnesota opens training camp in late September.
The Timberwolves acquired Richardson in late July, when they traded Mark Madsen, Craig Smith and Sebastian Telfair to the Los Angeles Clippers for the 29-year-old swingman.
0 recs |
160 comments
Email
Print
Comments
Once is bad luck, twice is careless
Blount?
There isn’t another Blount I’m not aware of us there?
Someone explain this. Please. And my Kool-aid tastes funny……
Only cowards pray for rain.
by Auswolf on Aug 13, 2009 10:30 PM CDT via mobile reply actions 0 recs
My Kool-aid just got a little bitter...
..OK, I expected nothing for QRich and am not surprised there. But essentially the Wolves traded Bassy, Rhino, and Mad Dog for Blount????
The payroll basically stays the same and nothing was gained such as a 2nd rounder. They save Bassy’s option for next season, but the option wasn’t outrageous.
The bitter Kool-aid comes from the fact that all they got for these guys was getting out of Bassy’s option. I can’t believe they couldn’t have gotten at least a 2nd rounder just for Rhino from a team willing to use a trade exception (who would you rather have, a proven Rhino or DeJuan Blair)? I even thought they could have gotten a low 2nd rounder for Bassy… it’s hard to believe, but maybe that is the current economic environment in the NBA.
I suppose they may save a little more if they buy out Blount, or wait to see if another team’s center gets injured before the season starts. Hmmmm.
by Rumblebee on Aug 13, 2009 11:01 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Salary Dump
Q-Rich – $8,700,000
Blount – $7,967,375
by wayno on Aug 13, 2009 11:16 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
money saved is money saved is money saved
by jeffreb on Aug 14, 2009 2:55 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
It's the same ol' Blizz...
I hope the part about him not being on the roster when the year starts is true.
by pagingstanleyroberts on Aug 13, 2009 10:32 PM CDT reply actions 0 recs
Fans dream of Josh Smith, Rudy Gay, and Gerald Wallace
Yet they wake up with Mark Blount. I’d hate to see what Blount could get you in a trade.
by Jose Cordoba on Aug 13, 2009 10:38 PM CDT reply actions 0 recs
Why would the Wolves
want McGrady’s salary? Why would Houston want Blount along with other junk salaries?
by Jose Cordoba on Aug 13, 2009 11:29 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Not sure
but I think Wayno is being sarcastic.
Timberwolves - NBA champs 2013!
(used with permission - Wolf in MO)
by frankenhoops on Aug 14, 2009 10:31 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
I bet we buy him out....
And save 1.4m.
Which will be our total yield from Bassy, Rhino and Madsen.
I know QRich isn’t Kobe, but we are short handed at 2/3 and he could have been traded more effectively at the deadline.
Only cowards pray for rain.
by Auswolf on Aug 13, 2009 10:42 PM CDT via mobile reply actions 0 recs
qrich would have given us less than a hopefully resigned carney can.
gomes/brew/wilkins/carney/ ellington.
by revprodeji on Aug 14, 2009 12:39 AM CDT via mobile up reply actions 0 recs
Good Trade
1. We save money.
2. We lose nothing.
3. We weren’t getting an asset for Q-Rich till at least the Trade Deadline.
by Jose Cordoba on Aug 13, 2009 10:45 PM CDT reply actions 0 recs
Then we should have waited.
Only cowards pray for rain.
by Auswolf on Aug 13, 2009 11:18 PM CDT via mobile up reply actions 0 recs
For the love of...
Come on Wolves..Atleast get the most value you can get..WE HAVE NO OTHER SHOOTING GUARDS BESIDES ELLINGTON!
by TonyO on Aug 13, 2009 10:53 PM CDT reply actions 0 recs
I honestly don't know if a smile has left my face
Since this trade went down. We’re bringing back Mark Blount.
by Jose Cordoba on Aug 13, 2009 10:53 PM CDT reply actions 0 recs
I know
I just like the dudes name, Blount pronounced like “Blunt”
but the dude looks old, shoots threes and doesn’t play D really. . .it’s all about $$$
there’ll be more moves. Were not bringing in Mark Blount to play. If he stays it’ll be like playing a taller Brian Carndinal that doesn’t hustle, whatever. . .he’s got more promise than mad dogg.
by 123farve567-612 on Aug 17, 2009 7:09 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Shooting Guard
Brewer and Ellington can play the 2. If Rubio comes over- Flynn will play some off the ball. Besides who cares – Q.Rich was terrible. We’ve also got Damien Wilkins who can’t play.
by Jose Cordoba on Aug 13, 2009 10:54 PM CDT reply actions 0 recs
All the more reason
To use a large expiring deal to bring some talent in.
Surely there is something else…..
Only cowards pray for rain.
by Auswolf on Aug 13, 2009 10:57 PM CDT via mobile up reply actions 0 recs
Most teams
Are looking to pay the Hideously Bad Mark Blount 8 Million Dollars? The only return would be serious junk.
by Jose Cordoba on Aug 13, 2009 11:10 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Oh I know we will get nothing for Blount
It’s qrich’s deal that may have had more value.
Only cowards pray for rain.
by Auswolf on Aug 13, 2009 11:14 PM CDT via mobile up reply actions 0 recs
For the first time, I'm puzzled/skeptical of Kahn's move.
I just don’t get the logic. It really seems like this is just spinning wheels to me. We traded Telfair, Craig Smith, and Mark Madsen for Mark Blount? Why?
by LoveTo on Aug 13, 2009 10:55 PM CDT reply actions 0 recs
To get rid of Bassy's option
Bassy, Rhino and Madsen, Q, and Blount. None of these guys fit here past a year. Rhino has one NBA skill, but it’s the same skill as our best player and unnecessary on a team swimming in young PFs. Trading him was the price to shed Bassy’s option. LAC didn’t want Telfair. They were trying to trade him after the deal so that they could sign Sessions. They took him to get Rhino.
I’m fine with this as we’ve still got enough expirings to make a deal at the deadline if something comes up. Clearing out Rhino and Telfair opens up more minutes for Flynn, Ellington, Love and Pecherov. Good! Those guys are going to be here long term (maybe not Pecherov???).
I think this paves the way for Carneys return on a 1 year deal. Otherwise Ellington, Brewer, Flynn, and Wilkins should be able to cover the SG spot in terms of minutes. There’s nothing else out there that fit with Q’s contract anyway…at least nothing that fits with the long term goals that Kahn has laid out.
by Blond Ricky on Aug 14, 2009 10:56 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
I say there will be another trade this week.
I just have a feeling.
by KGMN on Aug 13, 2009 10:59 PM CDT reply actions 0 recs
I sure hope so.
How many of these rinky-dink trades are we going to have? I want some talent added. The confusing part is that Kahn already said there won’t be any more major additions to the roster, so it’s not like Blount is going to be packaged for some star player…
by LoveTo on Aug 13, 2009 11:03 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
How???
We don’t have the value to get much. The Pau Gasol trade has screwed up everyone’s assumptions about what you get in a trade. We didn’t have much for assests, and we’re not getting anything in return. No big shocker.
by Jose Cordoba on Aug 13, 2009 11:12 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Do you think it is the most effective use of Qrich?
Only cowards pray for rain.
by Auswolf on Aug 13, 2009 11:16 PM CDT via mobile up reply actions 0 recs
This time of year
Probably. A team isn’t going to trade a quality player for an expiring at this time of the year. Maybe once out of contention along with other assests- you could get something. I tend to doubt you’d get a young player that’s a good fit.
by Jose Cordoba on Aug 13, 2009 11:19 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
I'd add...
Who is more valuable in a deadline deal….a fat, washed up 2/3 who has no game beyond launching threes or a mobile big man? Blount gives a little more flexibility because he is an expiring AND it is possible a team could actually use him.
I also remember that Blount was a top 10 center in the first half of his full season with the Wolves. Yes, he quit in the 2nd half…but he has some game, and may want a new contract.
by DougW on Aug 14, 2009 4:11 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
And even the Pau Gasol deal had the Lakers give up young talent (Gasol) and some (not very high) draft picks. If the Wolves wanted an asset for Richardson, they’d likely have to include a pick or two, and I don’t know if they want to do that at this point.
It’s a pure bottom line move and not that interesting. Richardson maybe had a chance to play some minutes in their expansion-team backcourt, but in the end wouldn’t have been much better (or at least, $8 million better) than Ellington or Wilkins or Brewer or maybe Carney. Blount’s my least favorite ‘Wolves player ever (because of both his play/attitiude and McHale’s logic in acquiring him), so I hope he gets bought out.
But in the end, so long as they keep their cap flexibility next year, I’ll be content.
by jianfu on Aug 14, 2009 6:49 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
I certainly hope so Stanley.
Oliver
by Rumblebee on Aug 13, 2009 11:04 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Ugliness
With Blount back on our team and bring in the new guy Ryan Hollins. I think it’s safe to say we have one fugly ass front court
by mr.right on Aug 13, 2009 11:00 PM CDT reply actions 0 recs
And to think that we let Shelden go.. Ah, what could have been..
Jennings: F*** the Knicks, them n***** is always going to be weak.
by Xand1 on Aug 14, 2009 6:42 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Also, Mark Blount will be our only player who has played for the Wolves before 07-08.
It’s kind of sad.
by KGMN on Aug 13, 2009 11:01 PM CDT reply actions 0 recs
I don't think we lost anything in this trade.
A couple people seem to be saying that losing Telfair, Smith and Madsen for Richardson was significantly superior to losing them for Blount’s cheaper contract. What were we going to get for Richardson that was so great?
Blount’s $7.9m contract can still bring back over $10m in another trade. The only added value Richardson brought was a higher threshold for taking back salary in a presumably Gasol-style trade. I don’t think the odds of that happening before both contracts expire are very high.
The value of Kahn saving Glen Taylor $750,000 is higher than the value Q-Rich is likely to bring back. Kahn is building trust with Taylor, during a very volatile period, in the form of fiscally sound moves. Later, when Kahn has to get Glen on the phone in two years and ask him to shell out a bunch of money for someone that will push us over the edge, Glen’s more likely to say yes (even if we only win 60 games in the next two seasons.
This move is fiscal, nothing more.
www.canishoopus.com
by wyn on Aug 13, 2009 11:18 PM CDT reply actions 0 recs
But
Does this put the roster (further) out of balance (again)?
by Boss10 on Aug 13, 2009 11:52 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
My money's on Blount getting cut...
and three minimum free agents being signed. If, of course, Ricky doesn’t make it over before September.
www.canishoopus.com
by wyn on Aug 14, 2009 12:04 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Sorry, which is to say...
I believe Blount and Richardson would’ve had the same impact on this year’s depth chart: 0.
www.canishoopus.com
by wyn on Aug 14, 2009 12:10 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Out of curiosity wyn
Did you set odds at when Rubio would come over? (Your point about Kahn using this trade to save Taylor a little money seems worthwhile.)
No mistakes in the tango, darling. Not like life. Simple. That's what makes the tango so great. If you make a mistake, and get all tangled up, you just tango on.....
by pookeyguru on Aug 14, 2009 3:22 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Forget about QRich for a minute...
.. If it was reported a month ago that Telfair, Smith and Madsen were traded straight up for MARK BLOUNT, would you have approved. I may be looking in the wrong place, but I do not see Blount as a cheaper contract. Granted the Wolves don’t have to worry about Telfair’s option, but don’t you think Bassy and Rhino could have been moved individually for a couple trade exceptions and maybe a 2nd rounder?
by Rumblebee on Aug 13, 2009 11:54 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
It would have seemed a bit odd...
… bu it still would have been a purely financial move, just as it is now. And besides, I still haven’t heard a convincing case for Q-Rich being a better return for the Telfair trio than Blount. Neither would’ve made training camp, so it’s a 100% financial consideration.
If the Wolves didn’t get the deals a lot of people are suggesting, I don’t believe they’re out there. Kahn is clearly interested in change. Why would he not lift every rock to find the best deal he could with the parts he saw as interchangeable? I’m not placing blind faith, but I’m willing to give the benefit of the doubt.
www.canishoopus.com
by wyn on Aug 14, 2009 12:09 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
It would be kind of funny..
…to see how many times a player could be traded against the 125% difference to bring down the cap number.
Forever splitting the Cheechakos from the Sourdoughs
www.canishoopus.com
by Stop-n-Pop on Aug 14, 2009 7:58 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
I couldn't sleep last night...
… and spent at least an hour looking for the next link in that chain.
by TheH on Aug 14, 2009 8:09 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
WOW!!!
I’d hate to see your reaction if the Wolves traded someone who could play.
by Jose Cordoba on Aug 14, 2009 8:18 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
I think...
… the Mark Blount Test is an clinically recognized indicator of my need for medication.
by TheH on Aug 14, 2009 8:25 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
I'm not trying to say QRich is better or worse than Blount...
.. I’m just asking – Am I nuts thinking the Wolves could have easily traded Rhino and maybe even Bassy for a trade exception, and actually saved more money? They don’t save any money this year by trading the three guys and ending up with Blount. Also, the Wolves would still have either Rhino or Bassy and Mad Dog instead of Blount. I wonder if Kahn thought he had a better follow up trade lined up when he got QRich, but the other team/s backed away for some reason. Really, this trade doesn’t make sense unless I totally overvalue Rhino at $2.5 mil for the season. Let me know if I do!
I guess it is possible another 125% like SNP mentions could happen eventually. If a team loses a center in training camp Blount would be an obvious target, but this is not guaranteed. Also, I think people who speculate Blount will be waived have to remember something Kahn just stated. He does not believe in sending someone home and then sending them a check every couple weeks.
by Rumblebee on Aug 14, 2009 1:44 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
You are nuts. No chance was anyone going to take Bassy’s two year contract and Smith’s contract for cap space. Absolutely no chance. To anybody outside the lens of Wolves fans’, these two players are horrible. They couldn’t drum up interest on the free agent tour last offseason and both probably played worse in 08-09 than the year before. Neither contributed to a winning team.
by Ebomb on Aug 14, 2009 1:56 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
That's overstating things
I think Smith is viewed around the league as a quality back up and Bassy as a serviceable backup point guard. Even the Sports Guy has mentioned Smith as a quality player. Plus, someone did take Bassy’s two year contract and Smith’s contract for cap space – that’s what QR was, right?
I have to agree with Rumblebee. I don’t think Kahn got the best value for his assets on this one.
by TimAllen on Aug 14, 2009 3:51 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
QR was not cap space, Rumbelbee posed the question whether we could have traded Rhino or Bassy where we’d get back Trade Exceptions instead of a different expiring contract. To get a team to do that, they would have to think absorbing Smith or Telfair is worth adding salary to their team for essentially nothing. My arguments was that both Smith and Telfair are both so average, that a team would rather sign a cheap free agent than give the wolves a trade exception to take them off our hands for free.
My take was if these guys are so valuable, why did no one sign them last offseason. I think I’m right because shedding these two was all about reducing salary, why would Kahn trade these two away just to essentially buyout Mark Blount if their was a better deal on the table where he could save all that money this year. He would have taken it immediately, but it accomplishes to the goal of these trades better, cutting financial obligations.
You and Rumblebee hypothesize that Kahn left value on the table in this salary dump, that seems like poor conjecture because it would imply that Kahn just failed to call some team that valued these players as high as you do. I disagree.
by Ebomb on Aug 14, 2009 4:04 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
EBOMB's on Fire
I’ve said my piece already in support of this trade.
by Jose Cordoba on Aug 14, 2009 4:17 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
I am not implying Kahn didn't make phone calls!
Seriously, I have praised Kahn continuously. I am sure Kahn made all the calls. That is why I asked the question. I think most Wolves fans would think that at a minimum Smith could have been traded for a trade exception or non-guaranteed contract. I truly wonder if we overvalued Rhino. I’m not saying he is anything more than 15-20MPG backup, I just thought another team would find him useful with his expiring salary.
That’s also why I speculate that perhaps Kahn originally thought he had another deal in the works. Remember that from the beginning he gave hints that QRich would not start the season here. I just find it hard to believe he did all this a month ago knowing he was going to end up with Blount. If that was the plan, why not just do a three team trade last month and avoid the speculation?
by Rumblebee on Aug 14, 2009 4:24 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
I wonder the same thing
Was there really no-one that wanted to give up “something more” for one or both of those two ..
We got Rubio!
by Wim (Belgium) on Aug 15, 2009 1:45 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
What else?
Unless you’re giving up on cap flexability, I don’t think there were any other moves out there for Q. Unless I’m missing a veteran SG/wing on a 1 year contract in the 125% range of Q’s deal that’s being shopped? Anyone out there that fits that?
We’ve still got Cardinal’s and Atkins expirings to use at the trade deadline if necessary. Brewer and Gomes as well if options on them aren’t excercised. That’s enough to get all but the most expensive guys. We haven’t waived Blount yet either.
by Blond Ricky on Aug 14, 2009 11:19 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Telfair had negative trade value. We had to move Rhino to get rid of him, LAC has been trying to move Telfair since without success so they could make an offer to Sessions.
So…I’m fine with it. Neither was going to be here long term. Rhino might have back a 2nd rounder or more, but getting rid of Telfair is potentially much more valuable. $2.7 million more in cap space could make a lot of difference next year.
by Blond Ricky on Aug 14, 2009 11:14 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
I have no clue....
Didn’t Britt Robson claim that Blount was a locker room cancer who basically quit on the team during his last stay with the club? The financial dynamics of the NBA would make Machiavelli’s head spin. We need a good shooting guard. We need a athletic defensive center, not a soft indifferent scoring center. If these moves are only about money, it seems just another sign of how the NBA’s structure is making it impossible for fans to support it.
by ogishkemuncie on Aug 13, 2009 11:19 PM CDT reply actions 0 recs
Can you hold your breath for two years?
by ogishkemuncie on Aug 13, 2009 11:21 PM CDT reply actions 0 recs
I'm still breathing, it's just a basketball team.
I may not be in the majority, but one of the things I love the most in professional sports is watching a rebuilding project. No, it’s not a championship and may thus sound masochistic, but watching a team grow from nearly nothing is very interesting.
After it became clear (to me, at least) that KG wasn’t going to work out here, I got excited because the team I rooted for was going to be completely different in a few years. It’s given us fans quite a bit to talk about. In fact, I find the rebuilding Wolves more interesting to root for than the last 2 years of KG. I’ve never had a closer emotional connection to a professional athlete as I did with KG, but it became obvious that he and McHale couldn’t bring a trophy to Minnesota.
Things could’ve gone much better for the KG era than they did, but they didn’t. As a fan, I wiped the team’s slate clean when Kahn was hired (but also held, and still hold, a good amount of skepticism). This franchise, after losing it’s biggest star ever, still needed more change. And Kahn has done that. Period.
Is the franchise outlook better now than it was the day KG was traded? I think it is.
www.canishoopus.com
by wyn on Aug 13, 2009 11:29 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
a rebuilding effort is very satisfying… It’s been awesome seeing Portland’s gradual rise from Z-bo missing layups to boost rebound totals to 54 wins and home court… I’m sure Celtic fans love their title team, but I think there’s a special satisfaction in seeing a team built from the ground up and succeeding.
optimism ftw
by Cablinasian on Aug 14, 2009 6:11 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Well we're 2 years away
Trading Bassy, Foye, Rhino, and Miller. We return 3 of our top 7 in minutes including 0 minutes in the backcourt. Our draft pick might not come over till 2011. Our best scorer has a Torn ACL. We’re at best a 30 win team. Q-Richardson makes no difference in the grand scheme of things. I defended McHale more than anyone on here, and Kahn’s proven nothing to me. At the same time- this shouldn’t be the type of move that works up a fan base.
by Jose Cordoba on Aug 13, 2009 11:28 PM CDT reply actions 0 recs
We traded away $7.75 Million in 09-10 salary with the Telfair, Madsen, Smith trade and now paying Blount $7.95 Million rather than the $9.35 to Richardson the two moves were essentially salary neutral for 09-10. With the buyout I imagine coming for Blount, it may save the Wolves some money.
Essentially we gave away Smith, Telfair and Madsen to give the minutes to other people and be rid of Telfair’s salary for next year. With two rookie PG’s if Rubio comes over, this make sense. Those who like Telfair and Smith may cry foul, but I was never a fan of either.
by Ebomb on Aug 14, 2009 12:13 AM CDT reply actions 0 recs
trade idea MN/NO/LAL
MN in: Daniels, Ammo, NO 1st 2010 11.86M
MN out: Blount, Atkins 11.45M (8.70M)
NO out: Daniels, MoPete, NO 1st 2010 12.60M
NO in: Blount, Atkins 11.45M (8.7M)
LAL out: Ammo 5.26M
LAL in: MoPete 6.00M
NO acquires Atkins contract to get under lux threshold.
LAL moves Ammo for a much more useful veteran wing player.
MN acquires another future asset. Ammo takes over cheerleader duties.
by The Rambis of Kahn on Aug 14, 2009 12:17 AM CDT reply actions 0 recs
sup buddy. rgm in da house.
by revprodeji on Aug 14, 2009 12:53 AM CDT via mobile up reply actions 0 recs
NO just dealt Rasual Butler, so I don’t think there’s much chance they let go of MoPete. They’re barely over the luxury tax line as it stand today.
optimism ftw
by Cablinasian on Aug 14, 2009 6:12 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Doesn't this create a trade exception?
I’m not a TPE expert but if it does it would be a small one. Any eKahnomists out there want to clarify the matter?
by The Rambis of Kahn on Aug 14, 2009 12:29 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Shoulde be about a $733,000 trade exception
Traded Player Exception:
Exception, also known colloquially as a “Trade Exception”. Teams with a trade exception have up to a year in which they can acquire more salary in other trades (Trade #2, #3, etc) than they send away, as long as the gulf in salaries for Trade #2, #3, etc are less than or equal to the difference in salary for Trade #1. This exception is particularly useful when teams trade draft picks straight-up for a player; since draft picks have no salary value, often the only way to get salaries to match is to use a trade exception, which allows trades to be made despite unbalanced salaries. It is also useful to compensate teams for losing free agents as they can do a sign and trade of that free agent to acquire a trade exception that can be used later. Note this exception is for single player trades only, though additional cash and draft picks can be part of the trade.
by killerhoopage on Aug 14, 2009 12:40 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
I think there will be no trade exemption based on this line: Note this exception is for single player trades only, though additional cash and draft picks can be part of the trade.
Timberwolves - NBA champs 2013!
(used with permission - Wolf in MO)
by frankenhoops on Aug 14, 2009 12:17 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
The wolves
may try to acquire TPE’s etc to do what memphis has done this last year.
by TheEvilProfessor on Aug 14, 2009 12:28 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
a very tiny exception… pretty much allowing to take on a very young player on the league minimum. Not likely to ever be used.
optimism ftw
by Cablinasian on Aug 14, 2009 6:13 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
I hope ther is another trade in the works
… but on a more positive note (as much as I can scrounge up) Blount was a good jump shooter from 10-18’ out when he was here and is another legit 7’ center that may help space the floor and let Al work int the paint more often without the double & triple teams. I still think that Al is best suited at the center position. But many people still believe that he should play the four and now we have two seven foot centers that will allow Al to play his “natural position” at forward more often. We also did this without affecting our cap flexibility. I know that I left the obvious defensive liabilities because I was trying to put as positive of a spin on this as possible. I still hope this was a trade to make way for another trade whatever that may be.
The other slight hope that I have is that we just swapped players/salary to allow us to trade with another team that already had Q-Rich on their team this year. Is this possible? Who could it be – Gay, Kaman, Camby, etc. ??? Also, Kahn said that he made the trade to get Atikins because his contract was valuable and still hasn’t used this asset yet. Could he package Blount and Atkins in a deal?
by killerhoopage on Aug 14, 2009 12:28 AM CDT reply actions 0 recs
Can't trade Blount in a package deal
…for 60 days. Which is why this deal would have made a modicum of sense 2+ weeks ago.
by Boss10 on Aug 14, 2009 12:39 AM CDT reply actions 0 recs
why did Kahn or Miami wait to pull the trigger on this one?
by killerhoopage on Aug 14, 2009 12:43 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Miami appears to be smooching Wade's.... ego
ESPN today has quotes in which Riley talks about Q Rich having been a good perimeter player all his career, and Wade put something on Twitter addressed as if the guy’s a friend.
They appear to think Richardson can help on the floor.
by feral on Aug 14, 2009 8:45 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Might make sense
Q Rich played at DePaul and (I think) is from Chicago.
by pagingstanleyroberts on Aug 14, 2009 4:20 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Here they are giving a charity thing together
MIC’ED UP FOR CHARITY HOOPS WITH DWYANE WADE AND QUENTIN RICHARDSON
That was in July. Some other story referred to them as “close friends,” too.
If that’s a motive, this reminds me all too much of moves made to placate KG.
by feral on Aug 14, 2009 8:32 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Can't trade Blount in a package deal
can he be combined if the deal is within 24hrs? I can’t remember how that works.
by The Rambis of Kahn on Aug 14, 2009 12:47 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
I think this could it be broken down into separate deals like this:
MN /NO – Blount for Daniels
LAL/NO – Ammo for MoPete
followed by
NO/MN – Ammo for Atkins/Bobby Brown
by The Rambis of Kahn on Aug 14, 2009 12:54 AM CDT reply actions 0 recs
yes it basically turns the deal into a 3 way.
by revprodeji on Aug 14, 2009 12:55 AM CDT via mobile reply actions 0 recs
No Thank You!
I don’t want anything to do with Adam Morrison! That smells of a “Kevin McHale of a deal” – trade for a player that was drafted in the first round (that everyone knows is a bust) and play it off like we just got another piece to the puzzle. Ammo is destined for Europe and we shouldn’t stop him.
by killerhoopage on Aug 14, 2009 1:04 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
he wouldn’t play much. his primary responsibility would be to take over Maddog’s cheerleader position.
by The Rambis of Kahn on Aug 14, 2009 1:35 AM CDT reply actions 0 recs
It didn’t really feel good at first because I somehow tought we were getting more for him. When you look at it in the short term it just looks fugly.
I tried watching at it in the long run and it looks a bit better. At least we’re commited to playing our “core” a good amount of minutes (instead of trying to pry out a few wins with players that are only temps) … and if we’re gonna do that there’s no reason to keep players like Bassy and Smith around…
On the other hand, maybe I’m overvalueing them but I just get the distinct feeling we could have gotten some talent back. It’s not like we can’t use any late 20’s picks anymore .. we still got lots of holes in our core … couldn’t we have gotten a protected top 20 pick from LAC? Was their value really regarded that low that we could only cut their salary in a straight dump move without getting ANY (even if just slight) value back?
I endorsed the Q-Rich trade because I thougt it would bring just a little value back, no star players but at least “SOMETHING”…
We got Rubio!
by Wim (Belgium) on Aug 14, 2009 2:34 AM CDT reply actions 0 recs
It's 3:51 am where I am.
And I can’t sleep because of this basketball team. A suggestion:
Chucky Atkins to New Orleans for Julian Wright and Devin Brown.
Real GM said OK, and N.O. saves tax money on two positions where they are overstocked with hard-to-move contracts (minutes easily absorbed by Posey, Peja, Marcus Thornton, etc.). Minnesota picks up an interesting wing prospect in Wright and a body at shooting guard. Tell me this is sleep deprivation.
by TheH on Aug 14, 2009 2:52 AM CDT reply actions 0 recs
I fear
that even though NO is overstocked at SF they won’t be willing to part with one of their “prospect”. Every team has to put some pieces in place to have some talent left when the current core gets old. I’m pretty convinced Julian Wright is in that “next generation core” and won’t be traded for pennis on the dollar
We got Rubio!
by Wim (Belgium) on Aug 14, 2009 3:08 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
But when would Wright...
… realistically see minutes? Certainly not until Peja falls out, so they’re looking at paying him (and tax on his contract) until 2011 to see the fruits of their labors. Talent-wise, of course, this is pennies on the dollar for New Orleans. But what the team would end up saving for a player who sees less than 15 minutes a night for the foreseeable future might be enough to change their minds. Again, this is maybe sleep deprivation. Totally agreed that he is part of the core you suggest, but this team is in rough shape and ain’t nobody taking the Peja or Posey contracts.
by TheH on Aug 14, 2009 3:18 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Agreed
Depends on how dire the situation is there
We got Rubio!
by Wim (Belgium) on Aug 14, 2009 4:32 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Good ole times!
"I'm addicted to polo y'all...respect my fresh" - Travis25Outlaw
by Norsktroll on Aug 14, 2009 3:06 AM CDT reply actions 0 recs
Mark Blount!
Good Lord, please do not let him ever put on a T-Wolves jersey again.
Pining for a Troy Hudson/Marko Jaric backcourt.
by SBG on Aug 14, 2009 6:53 AM CDT reply actions 0 recs
I have to say
it’s a return on Smith and Telfair that disappoints me; a flurry of activity that seems to achieve nothing but thins the roster of a couple of guys that actually could help on the court this year.
I assume Blount will be bought out. What I don’t understand is why Miami did this. it’s more salary and they are over the tax line.
by Eric in Madison on Aug 14, 2009 7:35 AM CDT reply actions 0 recs
Miami is acting like they want Q Rich -- because Wade is buds with him, in part
ESPN
“We are very excited to add Quentin Richardson,” Heat president Pat Riley said. “Over the course of his career, he has proven to be a fierce competitor, a great locker room presence and a very prolific 3-point shooter who may be one of the strongest perimeter players in the NBA. We feel that he will be able to match-up well against the top scorers in the league.”
Richardson is due to earn about $9 million this season. Blount was to make around $7.9 million.
“Who would of ever thought we would play 2gether. Let’s get it,” Wade wrote on his Twitter feed, welcoming Richardson to the Heat family.
Getting Richardson could help the Heat in a number of ways.
Miami had four centers on the roster, and Blount was easily the most disposable of that group. Wade, the reigning NBA scoring champion, hasn’t been shy about clamoring for roster upgrades in recent months — and he almost certainly wouldn’t have any objections about the acquisition of one of his good friends.
by feral on Aug 14, 2009 8:48 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Wolves
If Rubio comes over have a pretty set 8 man rotation
1. Al Jefferson
2. Kevin Love
3. Ricky Rubio
4. Jonny Flynn
5. Ryan Gomes
6. Wayne Ellington
7. Ryan Hollins
8. Corey Brewer
With spot-minutes for Songalia and Cardinal.
They need to let these guys play and see what happens. These are the only 8 with any long-term value. The idea that we need to give minutes to Q-Rich is silly- since he plays the 2. Why if we’re doing a long-term rebuild do we need to do that?
by Jose Cordoba on Aug 14, 2009 7:49 AM CDT reply actions 0 recs
Agreed
I think that Ellington will get a lot of minutes so the wolves can really understand what he does well and what he can’t do. Plus if Blonde Ricky is here, then Flynn will get some select duty as the 2…but still not anything to bat an eye at. So Flynn/Rubio get all of the PG minutes, Brewer/Ellington(minimal Flynn) get the SG minutes and Gomes/Brewer get the SF minutes. Brewer will need a lot of playing time this year. The wolves will want to either be sure he won’t work out or know what they are getting if they sign him to a longer deal. The wolves may sign carney to a one year vet min if they can for a body…but probably not.
by TheEvilProfessor on Aug 14, 2009 7:57 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
One more wing
Kahn indicated in an interview:
http://www.nba.com/timberwolves/news/Inside_The_Deal-090805.html
…that if they found a taker for Q, they would likely be looking to add one more wing. Carney seems like the logical choice: young, athletic, knows the players. I wouldn’t mind it, the guy showed some flashes, and could benefit from the switch to uptempo.
I really don’t want to see Gomes play 30min a game. He’s too slow to guard a lot of 3s and is really an ideal 7-8th man.
by DougW on Aug 14, 2009 8:18 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
I hear Rashad McCants is available top provide depth at the wing ;-)
Songaila likely will see more than spot minutes. And he should, when the alternative is Cardinal.
"I'm addicted to polo y'all...respect my fresh" - Travis25Outlaw
by Norsktroll on Aug 14, 2009 8:08 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
What a bad dream this must be
for Jefferson and Gomes to be stuck on this team. And KG must just shake his head when he looks in the rear view mirror.
Why didn’t the Heat and Clippers just trade each other for QRich/Blount and leave us out of it?
by SotaPop on Aug 14, 2009 8:29 AM CDT reply actions 0 recs
Miami didn’t have a PG like Sebastian Telfair that they wanted to part with (or the Clipps didn’t want Chalmers or Quinn).
In a move of karmic proportions, Mark Blount now gets to spend his winter in Minneapolis instead of Miami.
by levi_mn on Aug 14, 2009 9:17 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Could this all be a move to collect trade exceptions, so we can essentially trade a team nothing (2 trade exceptions and Atkins) for a solid mid-level player?
Check out Humdinger TV on YouTube.
http://twitter.com/HumdingerTV
by HumdingerTV on Aug 14, 2009 8:29 AM CDT reply actions 0 recs
Trade exceptions can't be combined with other assets (picks, players, other exceptions). They don't get traded, you absorb the salary of 1 player at a time with them whose salary has to fit under the exception.
"I'm addicted to polo y'all...respect my fresh" - Travis25Outlaw
by Norsktroll on Aug 14, 2009 12:12 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
I had to check espn.com to see if Kandi was still in the league.
Figured Kahn could keep trading until he got to an even more disappointing C.
I think we might need to give up the dream about getting a legit player for a lousy player with an expiring contract.
by Punisher#8 on Aug 14, 2009 8:52 AM CDT reply actions 0 recs
The net in Kahn's trades...(ain't pretty)
Looking simply at trades, here’s what Kahn got done.
Coming in, Kahn had these players under contract:
$9.880 Miller
$3.575 Foye
$2.840 Madsen
$2.300 Smith
$2.500 Telfair
$21.095 total for five roster slots
After several trades, he has these:
$4.526M Songaila
$3.630M Wilkins
$1.547M Pecherov
$3.480M Atkins
$7.967M Blount
$21.150M total for five roster slots
Sent two 2nd round draft choices to OKC
Obtained the rights to Rubio (value TBD)
Saved $2.700M in 2010 in salary to Telfair
Anything else?
by levi_mn on Aug 14, 2009 9:08 AM CDT reply actions 0 recs
forgot Songaila's 2010 player option
http://sports.espn.go.com/nba/news/story?id=2522205
(Hoopus shows $4.818M in “Early Termination”)
So that makes:
Saved $2.700M in 2010 salary to Telfair
Spent $4.818M in 2010 salary to Songaila
net $2.118 additional salary committed in 2010
by levi_mn on Aug 14, 2009 9:36 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
The more I look...
… the more I’m surprised we didn’t pick up a second-rounder or two along the way here. I’m positive about Rubio, so in my book that’s a pretty big plus. But take that away and it looks a lot shakier. A lot.
by TheH on Aug 14, 2009 9:52 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
so really what we are saying
is that the wolves traded about 2.2M in additional salary split between this year and next, plus 2 2nd round draftpicks for Rubio? Although the wolves could buyout Atkins and have actually have gotten rubio and 300K for 2 2nd round draft picks. Kind of.
by TheEvilProfessor on Aug 14, 2009 9:53 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
yes, that's what the numbers say
I left off the Atkins buyout potential because a) it hasn’t actually happened and b) I don’t think it will.
Maybe with Rubio onboard, you jettison Chucky and keep Bobby Brown, but I don’t see Brown as the primary backup for Flynn.
by levi_mn on Aug 14, 2009 10:09 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
jettison atkins to save money
and sign Bobby Jackson for 1mil one year deal?
by TheEvilProfessor on Aug 14, 2009 10:43 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Sid Hartman would love that. But not me. Isn’t it time the Wolves stopped wearing Gopher underwear?
by levi_mn on Aug 14, 2009 11:13 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
I think from a talent standpoint
the wolves are better off trading atkins to a cash strapped team to get something in return at some point during the season and then picking up a vet pg for the minimum just for PT, but it all depends on whether the wolves want to save money…or improve their balance sheet so to speak.
by TheEvilProfessor on Aug 14, 2009 11:36 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Don't forget Atkins
can be waived for additional savings.
They also traded a 2nd rounder to Dallas? for cash.
Traded what was 18th pick in a so so draft for what S/B a better pick in a future draft.
by Rumblebee on Aug 14, 2009 1:53 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
The Calathes deal...
Includes a 2nd-rounder coming back this way and cash.
by pagingstanleyroberts on Aug 14, 2009 4:24 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Looking
at it that way … it seems like all the salary cutting after the Rubio trade really was more of a necessity than a luxury. He had to do it to make room for the new rookie contracts and the fact the trade brought in salary…
The Rubio trade was the masterpiece, the rest is cause→effect.
We got Rubio!
by Wim (Belgium) on Aug 15, 2009 1:54 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
salary cutting? room for rookies? not yet...
In point of fact, so far, salary was added this year and next.
No extra roster slots were opened by the trades.
It is possible that Atkins will be waived, saving $2.7M of his $3.5M salary due if he plays.
Only Telfair’s $2.7M for next year has been “cut”, but that was overbalanced by adding the commitment next year to Songaila for $4.8M.
by levi_mn on Aug 15, 2009 10:00 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
yes, but
that’s if you include the Rubio trade … If I got it right (I could be wrong) than the Rubio trade is the one that increased our payroll .. it’s the trades after that that were purely salary based.
So
cause
Rubio trade: brought in talent but increased our payroll
effect:
we need to cut salary to even keep the level of salary we had before … and if possible do some more to make room for rookies…
We got Rubio!
by Wim (Belgium) on Aug 15, 2009 10:08 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
The intial BIG trade for the #5 draft pick...
“only” added less than $1M to this year’s salary. Perhaps more significant was the extra roster slot (2 players became 3). But neither of those facts seems particularly extreme enough to drive the three trades that followed.
Did drafting both Rubio and Flynn make it imperative to trade Telfair? Maybe. But I think the same logic applies to Telfair if they had gotten Evans and Flynn instead .
by levi_mn on Aug 15, 2009 5:23 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
If the 1M thing is true than I withdraw my earlier comments, should have looked it up myself :)
We got Rubio!
by Wim (Belgium) on Aug 16, 2009 3:39 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
I was hoping to inspire some outside of the hoopla thinking about why Kahn has made the moves he has, so I thank you for offering up a scenario that I hadn’t considered.
by levi_mn on Aug 16, 2009 9:28 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
We swapped Songaila's player option
for Randy Foyes QO (or new contract).
Only cowards pray for rain.
by Auswolf on Aug 15, 2009 5:56 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Wim
I really like your analysis but I have a real pet peeve with one thing.
It is absolutely wrong to call it “the Rubio Trade”.
No one (including the Twolves) expected Rubio to be available at #5. Kahn was trading in hopes of snagging Evans. He got absolutely blind lucky to get Rubio. (About time we got lucky – I am happy with that !!)
But to refer it as “the Rubio Trade” seems to insinuate that Kahn proactively traded to get Rubio. Not true. He was lucky.
by Just A Fan on Aug 15, 2009 12:34 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Agree on all your points
though I just tought it was easier to call it “the rubio trade” instead of “the trade for the #5 pick that eventually landed us Rubio” .. but I get your point ;)
We got Rubio!
by Wim (Belgium) on Aug 16, 2009 3:41 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Wow, tough crowd this morning. How about looking at it this way: We traded Madsen for Blount. We needed an end-of-the-bench center on our roster, and now we have one. Good riddance to Mad Dog. I also never liked the idea of Q-Rich on the Wolves. He’s a selfish player, and would not have listened to any complaints from the rookie PG’s.
by Dave T on Aug 14, 2009 9:57 AM CDT reply actions 0 recs
It's becoming clear
that money is driving a lot of decisions. That’s OK, but it appears that Kahn is trying to save some jing this year and maximize cap space next year.
Given that, it seems obvious that Atkins will be waived, and I would be surprised if they don’t waive Gomes after this season to reduce that guaranteed money.
The interesting decision becomes Corey Brewer. The decision on whether to pick up his 2010-11 option has to be made by October 31st of this year
So they have to make a call on him without seeing him in games. I had been assuming that they would pick up the option, but now I’m not sure. If I had to bet today I would bet against it, actually. I think Kahn really wants to clear the decks for next summer. I’m sure if he could enter the off-season next year with only Jefferson, Love, Rubio, Flynn, and Hollins (and Gomes’ $1 million) he would love that.
by Eric in Madison on Aug 14, 2009 11:04 AM CDT reply actions 0 recs
And Ellington.
Pining for a Troy Hudson/Marko Jaric backcourt.
by SBG on Aug 14, 2009 11:09 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
and Songaila
I even seem to recall Kahn mentioning Darius playing through 2010. He’s got some sort of deal guaranteeing him money. Canis Hoopus shows “Early Termination”, what I saw reported was “Player Option”.
by levi_mn on Aug 14, 2009 11:31 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
The ETO...
….is his option. He can choose to opt out of the deal. I believe it’s what Kobe and Boozer had this year.
Forever splitting the Cheechakos from the Sourdoughs
www.canishoopus.com
by Stop-n-Pop on Aug 14, 2009 11:33 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
It's what Boozer had but not what Kobe had
As a pure technicality, a ETO has to be multiple years before the “end” of a contract and are also limited to 5+ year deals. Also, option years cannot have a lower salary than the previous year, while an ETO can in theory (but never does).
Also, the mechanism is a little different in meaningless ways, since a player option is affirmative (opt in) and an ETO is an opt out.
by dprodigy19 on Aug 14, 2009 2:13 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
The most important difference is the timing of the two
With an ETO, you can wait until June 30th to opt out, and with a player opt out I think the date to opt out is before the draft.
No mistakes in the tango, darling. Not like life. Simple. That's what makes the tango so great. If you make a mistake, and get all tangled up, you just tango on.....
by pookeyguru on Aug 14, 2009 3:28 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Nope
Player options and ETO’s can be decided on June 30th.
Baron opted out (ETO) on June 30, 2008 and Carlos Boozer picked up his player option on June 30, 2009
by dprodigy19 on Aug 17, 2009 3:30 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Ellington I forgot
Yes, Songaila has a player option; what I meant was I’m sure Kahn would love to jettison that if he could.
by Eric in Madison on Aug 14, 2009 11:43 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
No to Brewer
No way I’d pick up his option. I don’t think he’s going to develop into much of a player, but even if turns things around a bit, he’s still not going to warrant a $3.7 million salary next year. Decline the option…we’ll have the cap space to sign him if his play warrants it.
Or trade Atikins and Brewer to NOH for Daniels and Julian Wright!!!
by Blond Ricky on Aug 14, 2009 10:38 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Didn't Kahn
already hint they won’t guarantee him anything. “Brewer will have to show what he can do”. Doesn’t that sound like a “no guaranteed contract and we’ll see how he performs, if he does well we offer him a fair contract”.
We got Rubio!
by Wim (Belgium) on Aug 15, 2009 1:57 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Wolves save a million to sign Carney
I’m guessing they’ll use the savings to sign Carney to a 2 year deal for about 1 million a year, with team option for 3rd year. You heard it here first…
by DR_JPK on Aug 14, 2009 1:00 PM CDT reply actions 0 recs
Are the wolves going to be players in the 2010 free-agent class?
This is coming from an avid fan, who is hopelessly confused by the salary cap and inner workings of the NBA.
Im not suggesting we try to get LJ or Wade, but a good player who could actually start?
by DaTwins on Aug 14, 2009 1:03 PM CDT reply actions 0 recs
Buying out Blount
The rumor is that Kahn plans on cutting Blount, which would save the team 1.2 million. http://firedavidkahn.wordpress.com/
by firedavidkahn on Aug 14, 2009 1:20 PM CDT reply actions 0 recs
If Blounts' contract isn't fully guaranteed
I really like this trade. Although their would be few options at the Trade Deadline- this season without any large expirings.
by Jose Cordoba on Aug 14, 2009 2:57 PM CDT reply actions 0 recs
Five out of the Top Ten
expiring contracts have been (or currently are) on the Timberwolves roster this year.
by levi_mn on Aug 14, 2009 10:29 PM CDT reply actions 0 recs
This is a wash
If we waive Blount, we’ll essentially have waived Telfair, Smith and Madsen. I’m actually fine with that. Those players would have added what…2 or 3 wins? I’m more than happy to let their minutes go to guys who figure in the long term plan like Flynn, Love, Hollins, and possibly Pecherov.
by Blond Ricky on Aug 14, 2009 10:36 PM CDT reply actions 0 recs
Why waive Blount?
We can trade him straight up for Darko, Jerome James, or…wait for it…wait for it…..Mike James. Awesome. Not only can we close the epic Q Rich era, we can close the Blount era (sorry Mayn), of course we have to then re-open the Mike James era.
Seriously, how do guys like Bobby Simmons, Mike James, and Keith van Horn get those contracts? Really?
Anyway. So, Mike James. Flip that dude into Raja Bell. Flip Raja Bell into…wait for it….wait for it… Trenton MFing Hassell. KG into Bassy into Q into Blount into James into Bell into Hassell. Virtual karmic exorcism. Can we figure out a way to sign Sam and acquire Jaric?
Okay, Trenton. Flip that dude into Kurt Thomas. Flip Kurt into Brian Scalabrine. And Flip Scalabine into…wait for it…wait for it…..Ricky MFing Davis! Oh, can it get any better? Seriously, each individual trade works on RealGM. Of course, any obtuse CBA things or kickers might confound it all, but it is literally possible to turn Q Rich at $9.3M into Ricky Davis at $2.4M, and we get to revisit Blount and Trenton along the way, while saving $7M.
Flip Ricky into Jarvis Hayes. And Jarvis into into…wait for it…wait for it…Devean George at $1.6M. We get a pro, a local boy, can fill some minutes and save over $6M.
If Kahn can’t get this done I am jumping off the bandwagon.
(678): Words of Wisdom: ordering a pitcher of whiskey cokes, putting a straw in it, and calling it your drink is not socially acceptable
by CaliWolf on Aug 14, 2009 11:17 PM CDT reply actions 4 recs
Nice work.
Only cowards pray for rain.
by Auswolf on Aug 14, 2009 11:55 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
SOMEBODY
has too much time on his hands … ;)
We got Rubio!
by Wim (Belgium) on Aug 15, 2009 1:59 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
I hope Mr. Kahn sees this...
…and extends a job offer immediately. This is what I call management.
But you know what? I think that this trade of Q for Blount was actually done to set up a debt — now Riley owes Kahn. It is all part of a premeditated deal that is gonna ship Ricky to Miami for Beasley.
Although I’m not sure I want that deal. Oh well, Kahn can always stiff Riley and make him keep the Beas knees in Miami…
by timmuggs on Aug 16, 2009 8:47 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Jared Jeffries?
Lengthy SF, now qualifies under 125% + 100000 rule.
Destitute man’s AK47, salary for 2010 problematic, especially for Knicks!
by WinTheLottery on Aug 16, 2009 10:57 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Very nice -
Could you get it down to a NBADLeaguer for minimum?? That would be AWESOME!!
Timberwolves - NBA champs 2013!
(used with permission - Wolf in MO)
by frankenhoops on Aug 17, 2009 1:03 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Comments For This Post Are Closed
Secondary Sidebar
FanPosts
Community blog posts and discussion.
Certain photos copyright © 2010 by Associated Press or Getty Images. Any commercial use or distribution without the express written consent of Associated Press and Getty Images is strictly prohibited.
