I had lunch with Mr. Kahn today....
An interesting thread posted by scooter13 at Rubechat about the season ticket-holder lunch held yesterday. A couple of highlights:
- Richardson's chances of wearing a Wolves jersey: 50/50
- Atkins's chances of the same: 99/1 (99 being 'no')
- Cardinal will stay for leadership
- Expect another trade in the next few weeks
- Carney's up in the air
- Pekovic will likely be here after 2010
- Traded #18 because next year's draft is better
- Identified lack of an 'explosive scorer' as a remaining need
- Continues to maintain he'll be fine with Rubio staying abroad for 2 years
- Brewer and Gomes have to 'really show [Kahn] something' this year as he couldn't get a feel for their roles. (other thread)
over 2 years ago
wyn
228 comments
0 recs |
Email
PrintComments
Thank you, Wyn--interesting
I wonder which “can’t be traded for 60 days” players on the roster are most likely to be moved at the end of August? Also, that “explosive scorer” obvliously has to be someone at the 2-3 position—anybody have any possible/probable candidates to be added via trade/free agency? I wonder as well if he intends to add a true, explosive scorer who is a starter (i.e. a Jason Richardson type) or some kind of Eddie House-ish off the bench guy.
Rooting for a Rubio Revolucion since roughly 10:20 a.m. on June 24th, 2009
I don't think they can get an explosive starting caliber scorer
for their expiring contracts. This will be an interesting situation. My read on it is still that he intends to wait until next summer to try to get that piece. I suspect any more trades this summer will be more peripheral in nature.
Frankly, I have trouble seeing how they will get that piece other than through the draft. I maintain that while the expirings have value, ultimately they don’t have THAT much value. You might be able to get that guy for your expirings if he’s already 32 years old, (say, Vince Carter), but you probably aren’t getting that guy when he’s 25. I’ve been wanting Kevin Martin, but realistically, I can’t see that happening.
The alternative is to try to actually get in on free agency next summer. We’ve discussed that it would be very difficult to lure a top FA to the Wolves, and I think that’s right. We’ll see.
by Eric in Madison on Aug 6, 2009 9:47 AM CDT up reply actions
I agree...
I don’t see how a Jason Richardson type (overpaid, overhyped) helps this team beyond a single season, and that type of move just seems so counter to everything Kahn has done and said thus far.
It seems like the explosive scorer is going to have to come from the draft or trading Jefferson or Rubio.
Might be waiting
To see if any team falls apart and panics at the trade deadline. You know, a Pau Gasol type fleecing trade. I know the chances are slim, but in this economic climate you never know what might be available, and at least we have some good assets to part with (that is, we actually could do this without blowing some of our key pieces, assuming the other team will take expirings). I know I know, at lot of ‘ifs’ there, but I think y’all know what I mean.
"Come on Eddie, let's get serious."
You're right...
That is the third possibility, and one or two of those…“this ain’t working out, this guy’s got to go” deals always presents itself by the deadline. We are in a good position to do one of those deals if it fits.
maybe even PoorDick’s Kevin Martin scenario….A team that crappy can’t afford to have its two best players fighting for minutes. Even if they are tanking so they can move the team.
Yes
don’t discount that move. I heart SacTown Royalty and all, but barring a miracle, it appears that team could be both bad and gone (and don’t get me wrong—if the Kings are #1 on that list, the Wolves are in the top ten). That could/should play a big part in personnel moves for them.
Rooting for a Rubio Revolucion since roughly 10:20 a.m. on June 24th, 2009
If you want a better shot at Kevin Martin
Root for Ty Evans to fail at playing point guard. Then Sacto’s and the TWolves’ needs will mesh (they’ll have 2 2s and no PG, we won’t have a 2 other than “Wayne the Drain” but we’ll have a surplus of PGs.
Rooting for a Rubio Revolucion since roughly 10:20 a.m. on June 24th, 2009
My Guess
is he talked about needing an “Explosive Scorer” in the future. I sure hope this doesn’t mean all in on Jason Richardson. So I guess the likely targets would be either Evan Turner in 2010 or Harrison Barnes in 2011. As Eric Points out below- they’re not getting this type of player for the assests at hand.
I think...
…Kahn mentioned on tinberwolves.com that he wanted to add depth to the wing positions or bolseter it a bit. So I think you are on the right track. J-Rich’s contract will kill all flexibility that he so wants in 2010, though. So, I am guessing that he is out the mix.
Explosive scorers on smaller contracts (and are young) are much, much harder to come by. So I am assuming he is thinking of adding via free agency down the road. We’ll see, but I think Atkins contract could be worth something to teams looking to cut payroll immediately.
I've said it once, and I'll say it again
Stop saying Jason Richardson! Stop saying Jason Richardson! Stop saying Jason Richardson!
I don’t know how or where the idea of bringing him in came about, but no matter how many times people explain that it would be a terrible move in every aspect, someone keeps bringing it up again.
Won't he get mad...
At you for posting this? The guys at TWolvesBlog are refusing to post anything because he told them he didn’t want to read any of his comments online.
by pagingstanleyroberts on Aug 6, 2009 9:43 AM CDT reply actions
Well, you can't invite 40 people to lunch
and really expect them to keep secrets.
by Eric in Madison on Aug 6, 2009 9:49 AM CDT up reply actions
I've found the same to be true
when inviting 40 people to orgies.
Rooting for a Rubio Revolucion since roughly 10:20 a.m. on June 24th, 2009
What, my invite was lost in the mail?
On a different note, here’s a paragraph from an NY Post story
“To promote the Knicks-Maccabi Tel Aviv exhibition, a Guinness-record-setting 200-pound, 3-foot high matzoh ball will be wheeled to a Lower East Side deli this morning. The ball contains 1,000 eggs, 80 pounds of margarine and will be available for serving at 10 a.m. at Noah’s Ark Deli on Grand Street.”
What would be the Minnesota equivalent? A huge bowl of whipped potatoes when we’re playing the Swedish national team? A ton of Lutefisk when the Norwegians come to town? Can we get something like this done, please?
by Eric in Madison on Aug 6, 2009 10:05 AM CDT up reply actions
Sorry
I’ll try to combine next year’s get-together with the Canis Hoopus trip to the Target Center. Also, we should probably wait until we get at least one self-identified female as a regular poster on this board.
Rooting for a Rubio Revolucion since roughly 10:20 a.m. on June 24th, 2009
We don't have any at all?
That’s disappointing
by princelyfrank on Aug 6, 2009 2:55 PM CDT up reply actions
If one is willing to step forward
I’m sure she will be celebrated and heralded like she never has been before.
Rooting for a Rubio Revolucion since roughly 10:20 a.m. on June 24th, 2009
How about...
…a manure spreader full of tuna hot dish
fantastic
T-Wolves basketball—catch the fever! And have some casserole!
by Eric in Madison on Aug 6, 2009 10:28 AM CDT up reply actions
Dammit
And I’m always making hotdish jokes. And I blew it. I suck.
by Eric in Madison on Aug 6, 2009 5:52 PM CDT up reply actions
Kahn or Scooter?
To be clear, I wasn’t at the meeting. I saw the comments on RubeChat.
I suppose I could merely link to the thread.
www.canishoopus.com
by wyn on Aug 6, 2009 9:52 AM CDT up reply actions
My bad
I should read more closely.
by pagingstanleyroberts on Aug 6, 2009 9:57 AM CDT up reply actions
I actually didnt post anything either...
over at twolves central becuase of that. I was t the lunch also and Kahn basically said that he is willing to be very open at these meetings but doesnt want to be quoted on a forum. He was put off I guess when he had his first one and immediately people posted the information on some blogs. Its a bit much to expect that it wont happen, but he was very respectful and he did seem to open a vein so to speak so I am respecting his wishes not to post this info. If you want to pm me though thats cool.
Can be traded alone
Maybe 99-1 odds to be gone Atkins will be dealt.
My Guess
is Atkins is just cut to off-set the Hollins signing.
Isn't it really just re-posting what's already out there?
Besides, it’s not like most people on Hoopus haven’t already identified these as among the most likely moves yet to come. And who knows, maybe he’s gaming us—trusting that someone will post this and thus throw teams off of what he really wants to do, as in,
“You’ve just been Kahned by the Kahn!”
"Come on Eddie, let's get serious."
I'm not sure that
explosive scorers are readily-available in the draft, at least, not ones who are explosive scorers a year or two out of college.
While we’re at it, here’s a list of the top NBA scorers per 48 minutes last season. Lots of big, unattainable/expensive/overpaid names there, except maybe the guy who ranked 15th.
Rooting for a Rubio Revolucion since roughly 10:20 a.m. on June 24th, 2009
Flip Murray's still out there!
Sign him up!
by pagingstanleyroberts on Aug 6, 2009 10:07 AM CDT up reply actions
That guy has been a rumored TWolf
for like ten years. If they pick him up, it will be a sign they at least are trying to get to 30 wins this year.
Rooting for a Rubio Revolucion since roughly 10:20 a.m. on June 24th, 2009
#32- we traded one!
Re-sign the Rhino in 2010!
That is who I intended to
note—my lame joke was brought low by poor execution. Story of my life . . .
Rooting for a Rubio Revolucion since roughly 10:20 a.m. on June 24th, 2009
Hmmm
Leandro Barbosa. Efficient scorer. Actually lost minutes last year because of J-Rich and Grant Hill.
Not ideal, but a better scorer than I thought he was. Good TS% and EFG. I’d actually have some interest in him, and Phoenix has a pretty high payroll this year.
by Eric in Madison on Aug 6, 2009 10:20 AM CDT up reply actions
Yep, I caught that one, too
it depends on where they go with Stoudemire, or if they just blow the whole thing up.
Rooting for a Rubio Revolucion since roughly 10:20 a.m. on June 24th, 2009
Wouldn’t his deal be considered prohibitive since it runs until 2011 and is over $6.5 mil per?
by pagingstanleyroberts on Aug 6, 2009 10:30 AM CDT up reply actions
Why is that prohibitive?
Seems reasonable to me. At some point, you have to actually spend the cap space, not just collect it.
His reasonable contract was one of the reasons I brought him up, actually. Better Barbosa at 7 per than J-Rich at 13.
by Eric in Madison on Aug 6, 2009 10:34 AM CDT up reply actions
It's in the ballpark of reasonable
But he’s still overpaid because he’s short, isn’t good defensively, and isn’t a point guard.
by pagingstanleyroberts on Aug 6, 2009 10:44 AM CDT up reply actions
As I said
He isn’t ideal. But you know…sometimes we let perfect be the enemy of the good. We all want to have a full-sized wing who shoots it, drives it, handles, passes, defends, rebounds. The problem is, that guy’s name is LeBron James.
by Eric in Madison on Aug 6, 2009 10:47 AM CDT up reply actions
That's my point...
I’m not saying he’s even that good. He got a big deal because he fits in Phoenix’s system, but he’s shown that he can’t play PG (that’s why Phoenix gave a ridiculous deal to Marcus Banks), he’s not a good defender, and he’s 6-3. If Randy Foye wasn’t a starting shooting guard, neither is he, so why pay him that type of money?
by pagingstanleyroberts on Aug 6, 2009 10:55 AM CDT up reply actions
Few Thoughts
1. We’re in no real need of having to use Cap Space till the Winter of 2013 (Assuming Love/ Al need Extensions). So we can go the Oklahoma City route and use Cap Space as a means to acquire assests like draft picks to assume Terrible Contracts.
For example- if the Knicks hadn’t traded their First next season around the Trade Deadline- sure we’ll take Eddy Curry and Jared Jeffries for worthless expirings.
My main point is we don’t need to rush out and use our cap space- we need to wait till when the issue is forced which is 3 1/2 years away. I think this could be one positive of hiring Kahn in that they’re is no need to force the issue by 2010 as was the case with McHale. I remember SNP telling me- he was done for if no action was taken by the Trade Deadline this season. Where as with Kahn in place- we don’t need to rush or force the issue.
I’m kind of ambivalent about Barbosa. I guess I would lean toward the no for what he brings to the table. But I can’t say the idea is terrible either.
by Jose Cordoba on Aug 6, 2009 11:04 AM CDT up reply actions
2013? Really?
You are willing to wait til then to try to make the team better in any other way than draft picks?
I’m OK waiting til next summer, if Kahn identifies better opportunities then than now. But 2013? No. Maybe I’m not getting your point.
by Eric in Madison on Aug 6, 2009 11:13 AM CDT up reply actions
I agree with you
But look at Portland, who went to the playoffs in Brandon Roy’s third year. They didn’t go after big names until this summer. So they don’t need to spend cap space in order to become a good team. That said, if there’s a guy out there who clearly fits and is a top-3 guy, then they should get him.
by pagingstanleyroberts on Aug 6, 2009 11:32 AM CDT up reply actions
I'm saying the issue doesn't have to be forced
Till we’re closer to contention. OKC had Cap Space- this summer they waited as they thought this wasn’t a good use of assets. If you can use Cap Space to acquire mulitple Top 10 picks before 2013 by all means go for it. You’re probably right in thinking that teams like the Wizards are willing to make such deals are rare. I’m just leaving the possibility open.
I’m not saying that we shouldn’t use Cap Space next summer- I’m only pointing out the this roster isn’t at the point- where we need to do something- just for the sake of doing it. I’m also of the mind if we get good it’s more likely to be with draft picks than Free Agents.
by Jose Cordoba on Aug 6, 2009 11:34 AM CDT up reply actions
"At some point, you have to actually spend the cap space, not just collect it"
Sadly, this is not true, and it will be proven out more so in the next few years as teams like the Wolves spend less money under the guise of “maintaining flexibility” or “save space to re-sign the crappy players without whom it wouldn’t have been possible to go 18 and 64.”
As I understand it, there is a “soft” minimum total team salary of around $40 million, but it’s not mandatory to spend to that limit.
Rooting for a Rubio Revolucion since roughly 10:20 a.m. on June 24th, 2009
Huh? What’s the point of a limit you don’t have to meet?
Jennings: F*** the Knicks, them n***** is always going to be weak.
It's a limit on the upside
to prevent dopey NBA owners from overbidding against each other (or nobody). It’s not required to be met.
Rooting for a Rubio Revolucion since roughly 10:20 a.m. on June 24th, 2009
Wow
A burst of true pessimism from you. Hearty congratulations for that dour vision.
Sure, that might happen. We have to hope it doesn’t.
by Eric in Madison on Aug 6, 2009 10:49 AM CDT up reply actions
Hope away
but it’s the truth. In fact, if the CBA/Lockout business doesn’t lower the cap dramatically, several teams will be doing it themselves. You can’t lose $20 million a year indefinitely on a $200 million asset, and no big, stupid money will emerge to buy teams at these inflated values.
Rooting for a Rubio Revolucion since roughly 10:20 a.m. on June 24th, 2009
And this from a guy
who was calling me “Captain Crabby Apples” just days ago.
The CBA negotiations are going to be fascinating. FIrst, I’m not sold that these teams are really losing that much money. Second, I hope the players grow a pair.
by Eric in Madison on Aug 6, 2009 10:54 AM CDT up reply actions
Neither optimist nor pessimist
Just my probably-inaccurate version of The Truth:
1. Rubio will be here, eventually. It doesn’t really matter if it’s this year, next year, or the year after.
2. NBA teams really are losing money, and will do whatever they can to staunch the bleeding (although, awful big co-inky-dink that all these rumors of losses are surfacing right before they head to the negotiating table).
Rooting for a Rubio Revolucion since roughly 10:20 a.m. on June 24th, 2009
The negotiations will be interesting
They already have a system in place in which the salary cap is a function of revenues. That number can go down (see this year, and apparently next as well).
So, if the NBA wants to further control it’s labor costs, it has 3 choices, it seems to me:
1. Negotiate a lower % of revenue for the cap than exists now.
2. Negotiate for a harder cap than we currently have. Eliminate certain exceptions and loopholes.
3. Increase the penalties for going over the cap (increased luxury taxes/lower threshold for tax qualifications).
My guess is that their approach will be mostly #3, with a possible dash of option #2. How much leverage each side has…I don’t know. The players did really poorly last time.
by Eric in Madison on Aug 6, 2009 11:45 AM CDT up reply actions
My gut tells me...
The the players will be more unified and that the owners will be the ones with problems. Basically, the small markets v. big markets. It could be very interesting.
Don't you mean
“small pockets vs. big pockets”? Portland is gonna be spending money like crazy, and is relatively small.
Rooting for a Rubio Revolucion since roughly 10:20 a.m. on June 24th, 2009
Portland is kinda of an exception...
…but I think the same thing holds true for them as it does Sacremento. They still probably think it is unfair in terms of revenue streams. Paul Allen probably wishes he made more money off the team, etc. We can assume that because he already tried to sell the team once.
NOOOOOOO!!!!!
WHY WOULD ANYONE EVER SELL A TEAM THAT HAD LA MARCUS ALDRIDGE ON THE ROSTER???!!! NEVER!!!! NOT AT ANY PRICE!!!!!
Rooting for a Rubio Revolucion since roughly 10:20 a.m. on June 24th, 2009
Actually
for one BILLION dollars I might consider it, IF I get to keep LMA. Paul Allen
Timberwolves - NBA champs 2013!
(used with permission - Wolf in MO)
by frankenhoops on Aug 6, 2009 12:21 PM CDT up reply actions
Notice that...
…he did not sell the team. Probably because of LMA. (And the swagger he had with the ladies being a billionaire with a team that contained LMA. Rawwwr.)
The problem for the players is that..
they lose all playing income as soon as a strike/lockout occurs. Half of the owners will be better off because in a short period (one season or less) they will lose less money than continuing under the current CBA.
Other problem for the players is that too many of them do not plan ahead. What killed them last time was the players who ran out of cash after two months of no checks. Same thing will happen this time if they don’t reach an agreement.
Simmons had a good article a while ago about how the upcoming cap situation. I don’t remember too much about it except that he came to the same conclusion you did, i.e. that the owners have all the power in these negotiations. I’m sure it’s in his archives if anyone is interested.
Jennings: F*** the Knicks, them n***** is always going to be weak.
The argument was that a large % of players
are poor money managers and/or have a staggering number of dependents (ie. hangers on). The tap doesn’t have to be off for long before many of these guys will feel the pain.
The owners will get a lot of what they want in the next negotiations. This CBA period will be known as the “Good Ol Days” in a couple of years.
Only cowards pray for rain.
If thats really the case
and owners will benefit from a lockout and players will be hurting, then doesn’t common sense dictate that players are overpaid and it’s really the owners who need a union?
Right,
but there’s a difference between a “cap” and a “floor” (one is usually on my head, and my head is on the other when I drink too much and fall down).
Much like the NFL, where many/most/all teams are under the cap, so will NBA teams just choose not to spend money, even though they are under the cap.
Rooting for a Rubio Revolucion since roughly 10:20 a.m. on June 24th, 2009
I agree PD,
you also mention a valid point about team values. Used to be some losses could be justified by team appreciation, but that probably isn’t going to be an option until the CBA gets improved (from the owners point of view).
And you just blew
your invitation to the orgy.
Rooting for a Rubio Revolucion since roughly 10:20 a.m. on June 24th, 2009
Hey! What did I do?
Of course, I probably wouldn’t invite me to my own orgy, so I can’t say I blame you.
by Eric in Madison on Aug 6, 2009 10:55 AM CDT up reply actions
I'll put you on
as an alternate.
Rooting for a Rubio Revolucion since roughly 10:20 a.m. on June 24th, 2009
is it possible to
(wait for it…)
blow your way into an invitation to the orgy?
(hide the kids, had a little bit too much cough syrup this morning.)
See
I should still be invited because I restrained myself from making this joke.
by Eric in Madison on Aug 6, 2009 11:39 AM CDT up reply actions
The last thing you want at an orgy
is “restraint.”
But I’ll put you back on as an alternate with TimAllen, in case a couple of people pull a hamstring (either their own, or someone else’s).
Rooting for a Rubio Revolucion since roughly 10:20 a.m. on June 24th, 2009
I even typed, deleted, and retyped that sentence
so it shows you that I’m neither brave nor modest.
Rooting for a Rubio Revolucion since roughly 10:20 a.m. on June 24th, 2009
I'm surprised you posted all this.
He specificially stated he didn’t want to get quoted or have the information “out there.”
Like Eric posted above...
He’s incredibly naive if he thinks that anything he says about the Wolves at a meeting of die hard fans will not be on fan sites and message boards within minutes after it leaves his mouth.
...
That doesn’t mean people can’t respect his wishes. They won’t be doing cool stuff like this for fans if it always gets leaked. I think it was fair to respect his wishes, especially considering how candid he was…
by College Wolf on Aug 6, 2009 10:19 AM CDT up reply actions
Based on his actions so far
I think we’re going to have to refer to his discussions as “Kahndid.”
Rooting for a Rubio Revolucion since roughly 10:20 a.m. on June 24th, 2009
Well, how candid was he, really?
He didn’t say anything specific that hasn’t already been reported.
Besides, you know what? He needs to do these things for fans as much as fans like them. There’s a serious need to market the team and keep the loyal fans happy—they have dwindled in number recently.
Look, it’s going to get leaked. Making comments to 40 strangers is not the way to keep things secret, and he must know that.
by Eric in Madison on Aug 6, 2009 10:23 AM CDT up reply actions
He was pretty candid.
Were you there? If you weren’t, how do you know what he said that “hasn’t already been reported.”
by College Wolf on Aug 6, 2009 10:24 AM CDT up reply actions
Well, if he said more than what has already been talked about on blogs and chat rooms
then I don’t see what you are complaining about—clearly the secret stuff is staying secret. None of the things that have been reported about this lunch meeting have struck me as particularly new or overly sensitive.
by Eric in Madison on Aug 6, 2009 10:26 AM CDT up reply actions
I'm not complaining
I’m just saying what he said about being quoted. It’s one thing if a random dude hears it, goes and signs up here or at TWB, and posts about it in a comment. However, I just don’t agree with a leading Wolves blog being the source to start and generate the discussion. I’m not mad or anything, so don’t get me wrong.
by College Wolf on Aug 6, 2009 10:28 AM CDT up reply actions
I disagree
We (by which I mean Canis Hoopus), have no obligation to the Wolves in this situation. The purpose of this blog is to share information and opinion. Here’s some information—comments from the POBO about the team, made to a group of fans.
Canis didn’t secretly sneak a tape recorder in to a meeting. Wyn merely linked to information out there. I think it would be much worse if he didn’t do so. This “leading Wolves blog” should absolutely be generating the discussion. If it didn’t, it wouldn’t be a leading Wolves blog.
by Eric in Madison on Aug 6, 2009 10:33 AM CDT up reply actions
Ok
Well then don’t be surprised if/when stuff like this ceases to happen.
by College Wolf on Aug 6, 2009 10:35 AM CDT up reply actions
You are being a little too whiny for me. Maybe you’ve grown a little too close to the team, but i agree with Eric in that this is a Timberwolves Blog where anything twolves related should be able to be discussed. Censorship is not independence.
If you really think a team that had the lowest paid ticket holders enter home games last year is going to “punish” their fans for wanting to discuss information about the team, I think you are mistaken.
I won't
though I actually doubt it will cease in the near term.
by Eric in Madison on Aug 6, 2009 10:39 AM CDT up reply actions
I'll say it again
IMO, nothing Kahn kahndidly said is anything that hasn’t already been tossed around on this board:
- Richardson’s chances of wearing a Wolves jersey: 50/50
Yup. If anything, I thought these odds were a little high. We all know Q was a salary cap move and not a talent move.
- Atkins’s chances of the same: 99/1 (99 being ‘no’)
Again, he could have stayed as a mentor, but this had salary cap maneuvering and future trading chip written all over it.
- Cardinal will stay for leadership
This one is interesting, but I’m not sure if I believe it. Cardinal did play well down the stretch last year—not up to his payscale, but he wasn’t terrible either. We could use a crafty veteran in the Sam Mitchell/Terry Porter mold though. Having said all that, wouldn’t be surprised if Cardinal is gone at trading deadline.
- Expect another trade in the next few weeks
This isn’t news.
- Carney’s up in the air
This isn’t news.
- Pekovic will likely be here after 2010
Will believe it when I see it.
- Traded #18 because next year’s draft is better
This isn’t news.
- Identified lack of an ‘explosive scorer’ as a remaining need
This isn’t news.
- Continues to maintain he’ll be fine with Rubio staying abroad for 2 years
This strikes me as not getting in trouble with the League by staying out of it.
- Brewer and Gomes have to ‘really show [Kahn] something’ this year as he couldn’t get a feel for their roles.
Well, this is kind of interesting too, but also somewhat predictable. Both guys have value, but nobody really knows what their value is right now. Can Brewer come back from injury and be even mediocre on offense while playing great defense? And is Gomes a super sub or just a poor starter? Not really earth shattering, though, that Kahn is taking a wait-and-see approach with them.
If we can figure this stuff out, I think it’s safe to say that other NBA teams have already figured this stuff as well.
"Come on Eddie, let's get serious."
Fair enough.
I suppose that is the undercurrent to all this—we want more transparency from Kahn/Taylor/Twolves, but the relationship needs to extend both ways through our loyalty and respect.
I’m down with that.
"Come on Eddie, let's get serious."
Respect?
Or is it really just about maintaining your inside ear to the organization and not wanting anybody to ruin that.
So you get to listen to Kahn discuss the team, but then can’t discuss that information with anybody. So you made a choice to keep that information private, but when others leak that same information, you start policing Wolves sites?
Sounds like self preservation to me.
Believe me, I don't have an "inside ear" to the organization
You are looking waaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaay too deep into this.
P.S. Any of the other 39 or so people heard the same stuff I did. Not too mention groups from other luncheons. It’s not like I’m the only person in the world that heard the info.
P.P.S. Yes, it is about respect.
by College Wolf on Aug 6, 2009 10:50 AM CDT up reply actions
Would you...
say this if it were McHale and Co. hosting the lunch…
This is not the first time the Wolves have held “lunch with the FO”. Was the information from those gatherings less confidential than at these? Do you think the answers were really more candid?
by Minneapleseed on Aug 6, 2009 2:33 PM CDT up reply actions
Under what category
Would you put the the information that’s in this post?
by pagingstanleyroberts on Aug 6, 2009 10:28 AM CDT up reply actions
Things he wouldn’t have wanted leaked or things that would be okay. I can see a few things on there that he might not have wanted out, like the Brewer/Gomes comments.
by pagingstanleyroberts on Aug 6, 2009 10:32 AM CDT up reply actions
He said he didn't want any of this to get out...
and talked about previous comments of his getting leaked. Therefore, I wouldn’t discuss any of what he said, unless it was something incredibly obvious and basic… or already being reported elsewhere.
by College Wolf on Aug 6, 2009 10:35 AM CDT up reply actions
I get what you're saying
That’s why I was surprised to see this out there, and I thought that BonK’s comments in that thread were about as far as could be gone under the circumstances. To me, the only comments that aren’t repeating what’s already been said are the ones about Cardinal and Gomes/Brewer, and I think they should’ve stayed confidential. The other things he’s said in pressers or could be implied from what he’s said in pressers.
by pagingstanleyroberts on Aug 6, 2009 10:41 AM CDT up reply actions
P.S.
How do we know “things that would be ok?”
We don’t. Hence the sentiment to not leak any of it.
by College Wolf on Aug 6, 2009 10:39 AM CDT up reply actions
I think CW did the right thing...
…his review of the meeting on twolvesblog.com was the right way to go.
I’m guessing that it will be a positive that CW did not run & tell, and that the guy who did will get snubbed next time.
Your right
Kahn knows very well what he is doing and saying at all times. Unless he gets invited to party with PoorDick, then all bets are off.
Well, then they should stop doing cool stuff like this for fans...
Because it will always get leaked.
And what makes the 40 fans that were there
any more priveleged than those that weren’t? Why can you hear it because you were eating lunch there, but I can’t because I wasn’t? What makes Kahn think he can even say that to people? This meeting wasn’t meant to be some secret meeting and it never had a chance of ending that way. The fact that he even asked people not to “divulge” is oh so valuable information makes me think that much less of him. So if he really has a problem with me knowing about the team that I probably put more time into than him (even if you do ignore the time before he even thought about being our GM), then I will gladly join the firedavidkahn website and do my best to recruit.
I didnt post anything at Twolves central either...
becuase of that. I was t the lunch also and Kahn basically said that he is willing to be very open at these meetings but doesnt want to be quoted on a forum. He was put off I guess when he had his first one and immediately people posted the information on some blogs. Its a bit much to expect that it wont happen, but he was very respectful and he did seem to open a vein so to speak so I am respecting his wishes not to post this info. If you want to pm me though thats cool.
Wrong Information
I agree with College Wolf. I was there too, and it feels like the least we could do is respect the KAHNman’s wishes to not repeat everything he says, as he was indeed very candid. It was about a 45 minute session, and basically the whole thing was a Q&A, with KAHNman never refusing to answer a question, and being very frank and honest in his responses.
Also, this poster must not have been paying much attention, because several of the things he stated were just plain wrong (for example, KAHNman said Q-Rich’s chances of being in a Wolves uni were 20%, not 50%).
My thoughts exactly.
And I don’t want to refute other wrong information, because then that’s just like me quoting what he said in the first place…
by College Wolf on Aug 6, 2009 10:34 AM CDT up reply actions
I thoroughly disagree with this
If, say, SnP were invited to meet with Kahn, and the condition of the meeting was that it was off the record, fine, you have a point.
But in this situation, he could not have reasonably expected what he said not to be repeated. There was no prior agreement of secrecy, and this was a fan meeting, not a journo meeting.
Fans and blogs don’t owe the Timberwolves their acquiesence and loyalty. They don’t owe the Wolves a damn thing. The Wolves are trying to generate interest and maintain what has been a crumbling fan base.
by Eric in Madison on Aug 6, 2009 10:38 AM CDT up reply actions
Even though they didn't make us sign some sort of contract or record promising not to say anything...
It’s about RESPECT!
Why is that so hard to understand?
by College Wolf on Aug 6, 2009 10:41 AM CDT up reply actions
It is also...
about your own personal integrity. So what if there is this big bad internet that allows people to disseminate information anonymously. It is very clear what some people’s word is worth.
Also...
If stuff that gets out doesn’t happen, or ends up happening differently than what Kahn initially said, people will be all over him about it. He doesn’t need that and it’s not fair to him.
by College Wolf on Aug 6, 2009 10:38 AM CDT up reply actions
What's fair got to do with it?
It’s not like he’s discussing internal trade secrets or national security information. It’s information about a basketball team. As fans, we get excited about potential rumors, trades, etc., and discussing this stuff actually increases our interest in the team. Therefore, we might be more willing to spend money to watch the team. All of which is good for Kahn. So, if they do not want it being discussed, they shouldn’t say it in the first place.
Ok, whatever.
I’m not the internet police so I don’t care what anyone else leaks or talks about. All I’m saying is what Kahn said about not wanting to get quoted or have this info leaked.
by College Wolf on Aug 6, 2009 10:43 AM CDT up reply actions
I respect your position, College Wolf.
I’d hope that I would take a similar stand had I been one of the attendees. Although, I would find it difficult if their was really juicy stuff there.
Thanks, I appreciate it.
And yes, there were/are lots of juicy tidbits. From concrete info that he said to witty/funny comments about stuff as well.
Believe me, I’d LOVE to post about it and tell everyone. However, I am going to respect his wishes… so I don’t care of much of a “square” that makes me.
by College Wolf on Aug 6, 2009 11:20 AM CDT up reply actions
I wasn't there yesterday,
… posted this via what I read RubeChat from someone who was there, and didn’t see anything about his privacy request except your comment and the one from PSR saying that you guys weren’t going to post anything.
www.canishoopus.com
Ok
Well then its not really your fault. I guess I assumed you knew what he said about the “privacy” aspect. Shame on Scooter13.
by College Wolf on Aug 6, 2009 11:24 AM CDT up reply actions
Word
I certainly understand your point about being there and respecting sources in this way.
However, if I come across something like Scooter’s stuff, I’m definitely going to publish it because this is a fan site first and foremost.
I’d also endorse the reminder that this is by no means first-hand stuff, and shouldn’t be treated that way. But, I ere on the side of openness and will continue to do so to the extent that my commitments allow.
www.canishoopus.com
Yeah
Being that you didn’t know what Kahn said about the privacy and not quoting, you personally didn’t really do anything wrong. On top of that, Scooter didn’t mention it of course (fail.)
I suppose I shouldn’t have assumed you knew. I can see why it is repostable being that Scooter didn’t mention it. If he had, then it’s a different story. However, it doesn’t appear that Scooter cares about trivialities such as that.
by College Wolf on Aug 6, 2009 11:43 AM CDT up reply actions
The point is...
…when people start repeating 2nd and 3rd hand what they heard someone heard someone heard KAHNman say, the story gets twisted. Then all of a sudden people are believing things that aren’t true, and KAHNman is getting misquoted. It’s like a game of telephone. KAHNman doesn’t have to do these types of luncheons with season tix holders, and it is actually pretty surprising and impressive that he does. But intances like this are the reason this kinda stuff doesn’t happen more, much the same as athletes often provide cliched quotes, as candid quotes often get misguided or blown out of proportion. The point is: It is about respect. Especially when he specifically stated that he did not want the Q&A reported on blogs.
The whole Al & K.Love as #2/#4 options quote is also a good example of this. Initially hearing this it sounds startling, and the quote got tangled and twisted to the point where people were upset with what was said, when in fact it was getting taken out of context. KAHNman discussed and explained this quote and exactly what he meant by it yesterday, and now it makes more sense.
Also, regarding the inital post, the Pekovic, Carney, Rubio, and Gomes/Brewer were all stated in ways that could be misleading to what was actually said, and I read them as stating something different than what I interpreted KAHNman to say in all those situations. And both the poster & I were actually at the luncheon! So think about how twisted this info gets when it starts getting spread 3rd & 4th-hand…
Concur
Besides any moral/ethical aspects in play, the story “getting twisted” has the potential to be a huge hassle and headache for Kahn. Like I said, he doesn’t need to be quoted incorrectly or out of context.
by College Wolf on Aug 6, 2009 11:30 AM CDT up reply actions
I think CW and Bonk
should not have brought this up at all on this thread. They compromised the confidentiality by confirming the subjects that were discussed. Now we know for sure, by their double sourcing the Rube Chat thread, what topics were discussed.
by Elastico on Aug 6, 2009 11:55 AM CDT reply actions 1 recs
LOL
This ain’t either of our “fault” buddy.
by College Wolf on Aug 6, 2009 11:56 AM CDT up reply actions
By your and Bonk's participation
on this thread, I now know for a fact what were the table topics and to maybe be skeptical of the facts presented on Rube Chat because you have a different interpretation.
Wow
Keep digging yourself a hole. This is probably the dumbest angle anyone could ever take.
Epic Fail.
by College Wolf on Aug 6, 2009 12:04 PM CDT up reply actions
No personal attacks.
Rule of the board. Maintain respect. Elastico is basically right. Saying, “Those aren’t really the probabilities Kahn gave” or “I thought his quip about Pekovic came across differently” does share some basic insider information. Just like if my brother tells my mom, “He stole two dollars from your purse!” And I shout, “It was only one!”
Remember to practice what you are preaching about respect.
Calm down.
Drop the sarcasm, and let other people have their opinions read if respectfully delivered. Isn’t this whole thing about respect for you? Or are you the only one who is incapable of disrespect?
Glad to hear it.
Given the lack of other posters “LOL”-ing at your “buddy” Elastico’s point or labeling it an “epic fail”, that might be a good idea.
Again:
“It’s about RESPECT!
Why is that so hard to understand?"
... to what?
Other quotes highlighting the inconsistency?
I enjoyed this
I agree that Elastico’s point is not absurd and thus does not deserve to be summarily dismissed.
But I also think that College Wolf hasn’t really done anything wrong, besides maybe attack Elastico a little too quickly (but he’s been defending himself all day here, so I can’t blame him).
What I do remember from Econ 101, however, is that the giant white triangle to the left of these comments represents a deadweight loss to society.
the giant white triangle to the left of these comments represents a deadweight loss to society
Totally. Lots of room for Google ads. Lots and lots of Google ads.
Rooting for a Rubio Revolucion since roughly 10:20 a.m. on June 24th, 2009
I see that CW and I...
… are both genetically hardwired to seek the last word. Truce, CW?
I may get occasionally annoyed sometimes in long discussions like this...
but I don’t hold a grudge.
Well, I still disagree with College Wolf's position
that this is really about respect. It strikes me as analogous to inviting 40 relative strangers over to your house, then when they get there, you have a huge barbeque going, with ribs, and steaks, and whatever else. Then saying: “please, don’t eat.”
However, what’s interesting of course is that the people who are advocating that position that it really should have been kept secret are the people who were there: CW, BonK, Kingsxman; the rest of us are begging for more like hungry dogs…
by Eric in Madison on Aug 6, 2009 12:09 PM CDT reply actions
We're saying it should be kept secret because that's what Kahn personally asked...
I’m not sure I follow you?
by College Wolf on Aug 6, 2009 12:11 PM CDT up reply actions
Well, I admit my analogy is a bit strained
but what I’m saying is, it might be “respecting his wishes” not to repeat what was said at the meeting, but it strikes me as little disrespectful for him to ask that. Not to mention completely unrealistic.
Of course, YMMV.
by Eric in Madison on Aug 6, 2009 12:15 PM CDT up reply actions
Ok, fair enough.
I just wonder why EVERYTHING has to be immediately posted on the net these days?
To me, it was something interesting and for fun. I don’t see why anyone has to rush out and post it, especially if Kahn asked not to. They didn’t HAVE to do something like that for fans.
by College Wolf on Aug 6, 2009 12:20 PM CDT up reply actions
Imagine this...
Barack Obama has a meeting with about 40 Minnesota registered Democrats at the Hilton in downtown Minneapolis. In the meeting, he says, “by the way, I think the next bill I propose to Congress will attempt to rename Minnesota to ‘Al Franken Land’”, and then he says, “oh, and this is just between us. Don’t go posting this on message boards or discussing this with anyone.”
What would you do?
Gravity always wins
Everything has to be posted on the net because that’s the way it is. No sense in wondering. And although I have faith in Kahn on the basketball side of things (going off what he’s done so far), there is no way he’s fighting today’s information flow.
And yes, they didn’t have to do this for fans, but I don’t live in MN, nor am I a season ticket holder, so honestly what do I care if he has lunches for you guys? Again, it’s not a “please respect his pleas for confidentiality,” it’s a “please respect his pleas for confidentiality, so I can be privy to more inside info and then not tell you.” You guys who were there have a vested interest in this continuing, I do not. So I’m in favor of hearsay. Sorry, it’s the off-season.
It's really not about...
who gets to go to these things and who doesn’t…
by College Wolf on Aug 6, 2009 12:47 PM CDT up reply actions
But yes, it really is
Those of us who don’t get invited want access to information. It doesn’t seem like a big deal to you because you were there and got that information. We are, as I noted elsewhere, the hungry dogs. Easy for you to say it’s not about that when you’ve been fed.
And why does everything have to be posted? Because, that’s the nature of instant communications—people communicate instantly. We’ve grown used to it, and I have trouble seeing that change.
by Eric in Madison on Aug 6, 2009 12:51 PM CDT up reply actions
Exactly
It’s not changing. Whoever posted this stuff on rubechat is who you should have a word with, CW. He’s the one killing it for you guys.
Yeah, I know.
I mentioend that with Wyn above.
by College Wolf on Aug 6, 2009 12:55 PM CDT up reply actions
Plus, keep in mind
that the people there are forking over lots of money to the Wolves, and whose numbers are small and falling. So it would seem that in reality, if anyone had the burden of keeping people happy, it’s Kahn and the Wolves, not the season ticket holders (Godblessem).
Finally, not to denigrate, but a little bit of Kahn’s swearing everybody to an oath of silence strikes me as “Oh, you pay us lots of money. Therefore, I’m going to give you some supersecret information to which only season ticket holders are privvy.” It wouldn’t be unheard of, nor would it be stupid to present the information like that. I’m not sayin’, I’m just sayin’ . . .
(p.s. Drink More Ovaltine)
Rooting for a Rubio Revolucion since roughly 10:20 a.m. on June 24th, 2009
Exactly.
Kahn is a very smart man. Dressing up information that is already assumed by the intelligent fan and certainly everyone on this board (like the “Brewer needs to show me something” shocker) as insider info only available to a select few people who are the heart and soul of the fan base and man, you guys are so important that I’ll share some stuff with you but you have to promise not to tell, seriously, if you weren’t such awesome fans I wouldn’t tell you, but you’re season ticket holders and, man, I can’t believe I’m doing this but I’m gonna be honest with you here, Brewer is on the fence, we just really need to see him show something this year, but wait, wait, don’t tell anyone that, this is just a super secret meeting for you guys and me, ok? Promise? Ok, good. That way I can give you insider gems like, like, the Atkins contract option is not going to be picked up, but don’t tell anyone, ok? You have to promise, and you also have to promise to feel really, really important and good about your season ticket investment!
Over the top dramatics maybe??
All CW is saying that Kahn asked thenot to publish his comments during the lunch. I will believe he (Kahn)did it because he didn’t want any quotes taken out of context. Was he giving up state secrets? heck no, but there were somethings that could be misinterpreted by either the palyer of the fans. That is all. Let’s all give each other a little respect.
Timberwolves - NBA champs 2013!
(used with permission - Wolf in MO)
My point isn't directed at all against CW.
Nothing in my post is actually aimed at anyone in particular. My point is that making it seem so secretive and important is a damn good way of making the invitees feel important without really giving them anything.
Perhaps
Kahn’s request not to distribute his comments on the interweb served two purposes
1. It might prevent him from being misquoted
2. It makes the invitees feel special
Both seem like possible motivations, although that first one ain’t working out to well apparently.
Which is why the second seems so much more likely to me.
Others may disagree if they feel like Kahn’s own interests have been undermined by the dissemination of the information.
I don't really care what his reasons were.
I’m just respecting his wishes to not divulge what he said.
See that I understand
but from my viewpoint here, it did seem more like a personal attack on personal issues. Your point of making the invitees feel impotant is valid and probably does (make them feel important) to those who don’t peruse the blogosphere in Wolfdom.
Timberwolves - NBA champs 2013!
(used with permission - Wolf in MO)
Mea culpa.
I’ve been reading Faulkner all morning, which may have something to do with it. CW and those of other opinions: in all honesty I was not trying to launch a personal attack and apologize if I have been misread. I believe the secrecy card to be a powerful psychological tool for the creation of social bonds, and I believe Kahn likely played it as such.
Leaving aside any personal comments...
.. I do agree with TheH as to Kahn’s motivation. If Kahn actually said “Don’t quote me on this” that is all he is asking, nothing in quotations being attributed as an exact comment. If he meant more, he would have said “keep this a secret”. He is a former reporter and attorney, he knows exactly what he was requesting.
Well, its hard for you to really know unless you were there...
in regards to how he said it, his tone, his exact words, etc…
That's why qualified my comment with "if"
That being said, I don’t know about you, but I HAVE heard Kahn interviewed on the radio on several occasions. I believe he likes to be a little cute and have some fun with what he says, which is fine by me.
This is MY opinion, based on what I have heard when I was there, by my radio. I’m sticking with my opinion.
So what part of this lunch
made you actually believe that Kahn wanted the 40 of you, BUT ONLY the 40 of you to know this information? Why can’t this information be shared on blogs? Because it will damage his rep? Then don’t say it in the first place Mr. Kahn. Obviously, this is the only quote that Kahn said during the entire meeting that got blown out of proportion. So maybe you should respect David Kahn like you are claiming to be doing, not by denying information to the most dedicated of the fan base, but by not blowing out of proportion something he says. I look around and so far I havent seen anything else he said reacted to in the way that you have caused this reaction. So is it your fault that this many people think of David Kahn that much less? Had you not come here preaching the respect you have for David Kahn, I wouldn’t have given this a second thought. But you caused exactly what you came here to stop. Or at least what you were pretending to come here and stop. To me, it looks like the only goal you had in coming here was to stop people from being as important as you are.
Come on
You’re blowing things way out of proportion. CW never said that he deserves the info and other people don’t. He just said that he was going to respect Mr. Kahn’s wishes. And if that’s what he wants to do, then let it go.
As I have gone through this thread
I believe it is you who is overreacting. I’m just basically taking your arguments and pointing out how you have done everything that you are arguing against. And also that there is no reason for this “confidential” information not to get out.
I'm with CW.
Kahn is walking a tightrope here….
He is giving out some information, keeping the FO connected with some influential ticket holders (bloggers). It’s good PR. I’m sure it’s intention is not to broadcast trading moves and the probability of an acquired player suiting up.
Should Kahn expect a leak? Not necessarily, but it is likely. I think you’ll find that if Kahn really is unhappy with what has been posted on Rubechat, etc., the information will simply dry up and the next Q&A will be full of hedged answers and “no comments”.
Only cowards pray for rain.
This wasn't about "influential" ticket holders
It was about marketing to season ticket holders on the fence, plain and simple. And it pretty much amounts to a bait and switch to have the sales office email undecided ticket holers “come have bfast/lunch with the kahn” (bfast was canceled by the way) and then when you get there say “don’t repeat what I’m saying”.
This was sales and marketing, plain and simple. And I do agree that whatever Kahn said, he knew there was better than a 50/50 chance that it would get to the internets. So whatever he said was in that context.
Fair enough
However, no one said anything about season tickets the entire time, so you are either wrong or they epically failed.
by College Wolf on Aug 6, 2009 10:23 PM CDT up reply actions
How is it an epic fail?
You obviously felt privileged be among the invited. I assume you’re also a season ticket holder, or were at least one last season. This influencer is to show you the perks of being a season ticket holder, i.e. hearing top secret Kahnspeak.
No longer full-time blogging at Ridiculous Upside, but still go check them out since I made them. Kind of.
by Scott Schroeder on Aug 6, 2009 10:36 PM CDT up reply actions
If this wasn't about selling season tickets
Then non-season ticket holders wouldn’t have been invited, and the invitations wouldn’t have come from the sales rep. I don’t think any reasonable person wouldn’t get the message: “membership has its benefits”. Kahn didn’t need to pitch the tickets. The pitch was: be a season ticket holder and get acess to Kahn.
I think this is a really smart marketing strategy, by the way, and definitely something the old regime would not do. But saying this wasn’t part of a sales pitch is naive. You protest way too much.
Do you disagree
Or are you simply playing the woe is me card because you were wrong?
No longer full-time blogging at Ridiculous Upside, but still go check them out since I made them. Kind of.
by Scott Schroeder on Aug 7, 2009 11:03 AM CDT up reply actions
Wyn-
Glad you posted this, although I didn’t learn anymore about things than I already knew/guessed. I am torn between respecting Kahns “privacy” and my wanting to be informed. However, I will think of it like this (and leave my mind open to change later): If you think of it as a “shareholders” meeting and leaking info is usually a no-no there, why would this be different? All the season ticket holders have a “share” in this years team at least. However, CW, unless I missed something, I didn’t see ANY mention of this meeting on your site. I would think (and this is just me) that maybe a mention should be said along the lines of “Had a nice meeting with Mr Kahn today and we discussed the future of the franchise, but due to his request for confidentiality I will not be disclosing information until it becomes public knowledge” Or would that just be inviting problems? I don’t know becuase in my job, if I don’t wnat anyone knowing anything I take one of two paths: “No Comment” or give politico speak and say nothing at all while being very verbose.
Sorry – didn’t mean to ramble on folks.
Timberwolves - NBA champs 2013!
(used with permission - Wolf in MO)
Of course, you mean the season ticket holders in attendence...
Yes, I know assuming that there are more than 40 Wolves season ticket holders is a stretch to begin with, but I know there are at least 41, since I am one and wasn’t invited to the meeting…(no, I’m not bitter at all. Thanks for asking.)
I made a post in our forums...
and mentioned that Kahn didn’t want any of the info to get out, or for him to be quoted online.
by College Wolf on Aug 6, 2009 12:24 PM CDT up reply actions
Thank you
sorry, I went back and looked again and saw that – thanks CW.
Timberwolves - NBA champs 2013!
(used with permission - Wolf in MO)
by frankenhoops on Aug 6, 2009 12:56 PM CDT up reply actions
Thanks for the post...
in these dull summer moments, it’s good to get any kind of Wolves news.
As for the confidentiality breach, I doubt very much that Kahn is that naive. He seems like a pretty savvy guy who understands how the modern sports blogs scene operates. If he instructed the fans not to leak his comments, my guess is that he wanted them leaked and wanted his instructions leaked. Like others have mentioned, it just adds more buzz to the Wolves, which is not an easy thing to do.
I’d like to hear exactly what he said about not leaking the information. If it was more geared toward “please do not misquote me” versus “do not share this information” then his concerns may have been legitimate. If he actually said that the info was confidential, that’s just laughable.
He didn't say the info was confidential, nor to "not misquote him"
He specificially said he didn’t want any of the information shared online. He said he didn’t want his quotes from the Q&A being shared. It was really pretty cut and dried.
by College Wolf on Aug 6, 2009 12:55 PM CDT up reply actions
This
is also a very good point. Kahn is both a lawyer and a journalist. If he really didn’t mean for the information to get out, methinks it wouldn’t have gotten out.
Rooting for a Rubio Revolucion since roughly 10:20 a.m. on June 24th, 2009
Yea...
NBA fans across the country are all wondering what this David Kahn guy is up to in Minnesota. Bizarro tactics like instructing 40 season ticket holders to hush after divulging a bunch of Wolves news only adds to the intrigue. I must say that I’m enjoying the Kahn Era.
This is going to cause a stir but I think
Kahn is going down a very interesting path when he tweets Zogda about trips to Spain knowing it would be immediately posted, in a very positive light I might add, yet demands “confidentiality” from a group of 40 season ticket holders when answering questions that just might not be so positive. Seems a little media controlling, doesn’t it?
I have been a season ticket holder since the early 90’s, though in fairness, I need to disclose that I share 4 tickets now with another company. (Arranged, by the way, with help from the Twolves ticket staff several years ago). These are not the cheap seats either. I am a few rooms up from the visitors bench.
So, why was I not invited yet CW was? Maybe CW owns a huge block of seats and, as a result, is a preferred customer. I can live with that. I value all my customers, but in truth some get preferential treatment because of how important they are to my overall business.
Or could it possibly be that CW runs a BLOG site that promotes Twolves talk, while I do not? That Kahn has a vested interest in keeping that BLOG busy with info to create interest which might lead to ticket sales?
My cynical side says that maybe, just maybe, Kahn invites CW (and Britt and other alternative media types) to build bridges toward getting his message out. Not necessarily the news, but rather, Kahn’s message.
So at what point does confidentiality become media manipulation?
I think you are looking at it the wrong way.
Maybe you have a point about me being invited because I co-founded TWolvesblog. That is a solid argument. I don’t think its true, nor have I heard anything from the organization that would lead me to think it is true. However, it is a valid point nonetheless.
What you SHOULD be questioning is why the other 39 or so people that DON’T own a blog were invited, while you were not. That’s the real question here.
So why do you think that happened?
And do you think they select the 40 people who will be invited or do you think they do it on a random basis?
I honestly don't know how they selected the people.
They might have invited waaaay more than 40, who knows. You had to confirm whether or not you wanted to go. And there was a breakfast meeting with Kahn too.
I don’t think its as sinister as Just a Fan described.
So far as I know
With a small sample size — the invite was to folks who were current season ticket holders with an emphasis on those that had not renewed. In short, this was a sales meeting, as the invites I know went out from wolves ticket respresentattives and were followed by an indication that the wolves would need a decision from undecided folks by Monday. And the invitation taht I saw (via email) DID NOT mention that confidentiality would be required, so I don’t think Kahn can rightfully expect taht he can invite you to what was essentially a sales event and then when you get there ask for confidentiality.
Or you can ask, but I don’t think you can legitimately expect it.
Actually
CW, I inferred that I was probably not invited in that I am not a full season ticket holder, only a partial. I would not consider myself to be in line for an invitation to a special event. Why musing about your invite was only used to raise the bigger issue. Which are
tweeting to one media outlet about positive spin is OK, forum messaging about things less flattering is not. Both our new age communication outlets. Why is one so OK and the other not?
historically, the media has provided information while maintaining the confidentiality of the sources – some have even gone to jail for it. Here is a case of a media source (TwolvesBlog) coalescing to the requests to withhold information. Seem to be a different perspective on the roll of the media. Is this a sign of change in the new age media’s role?
I would like to hear your comments, in a non confrontational way, on these points. Not because they are intended to be damaging to you (I like your site!!) but because I sense the communications standards to be changing with technology.
I apologize
if I seemed confrontational to you. I wasn’t trying to be, don’t get me wrong. As
- I think the main problem with people reposting the stuff on messageboards was, as because Bonk said, the story gets twisted. Then his quotes and thoughts and whatnot get taken out of context or are reported blatantly wrong. When Kahn HIMSELF tweets to the media, that’s completely different. It’s direct from the source (Kahn.) Posting on message boards is not direct from the source. I think that’s the main issue here.
- I didn’t go to this luncheon as a media member. I went as an intrigued fan of the team. Therefore, by me NOT posting on our forums, I don’t see how that can be considered the entity of TWolvesblog witholding information. That’s just not correct or fair.
Make sense? Apologies again if I offended you.
You raise a good point
on media manipulation. Because not only has CW not posted information from the meeting at his site, a more than respectful approach which in his shoes, I would have likely done the same. But CW is also here trying to dissuade others from sharing thoughts of the meeting and using words like “respect” to shame those that do. It’s one thing to give your own respect to Kahn, it’s a whole different thing to monitor fan sites and try and implement Kahn’s wishes. That to me is media manipulation.
Oh boy............................
I don’t care what is posted, I just asked why. I’m also not “policing” websites. I have a life, sorry. Talking about “respect” was the reason I gave for NOT posting information. Not sure where you are going with this, but at least get it straight.
And if it's "Media Manipulation"
than its the most ass-backwards approach I’ve ever seen. Kahn wanted to leak info and then hope and pray that someone who heard the leaked info would then go police random websites?
Yeah…. right.
Hey now
I’m not intimating that Kahn is sitting in a tall chair orchestrating all this. Clearly though he gave a candid talk and an emotional appeal not to disclose what was talked about. You took that to heart by rolling up in here hot and mildly uncomfortable with others sharing those same thoughts from the candid talk.
Did Kahn tell you to do this? Of couse not, that’s ridiculous.
But his emotional appeal to keep this conversation hush-hush clearly had an affect on you, and as a press member, like or it not, you have become somewhat emotionally involved in whether this chat should be talked about. Anytime the talking head for an organization can get the press emotionally involved in their story enough to stop them from being outright objective is a job well done by Kahn. This isn’t outright media manipulation, it is subtle, but clearly it worked.
Thank you
we really appreciate you helping us.
Rooting for a Rubio Revolucion since roughly 10:20 a.m. on June 24th, 2009
by PoorDick on Aug 6, 2009 3:08 PM CDT up reply actions 1 recs
I think the big problem
With this situation is that it was an extensive Q&A, and as BonK has said, some of his answers were interpreted in different ways. It’d be different if he answered like 5 questions. Something as extensive as this seems like a bigger problem because if he’s bringing up a lot of interesting stuff, too much getting out would be a huge problem for him. Taylor’s candor since the KG trade hasn’t exactly endeared the general public to him, and he’s not nearly as close to the action as Kahn.
With that said, I think Kahn knew that part of this would get out and asked people not to talk about it so that the amount getting out would be restricted. What’s listed by scooter and what’s been hinted at by BonK is probably a small portion of what he said and not that revelatory, so maybe this wouldn’t be considered a big deal. I understand TWolvesBlog’s reasons not to publish what they heard, but I don’t see Kahn being so naive as to think some things wouldn’t come out.
by pagingstanleyroberts on Aug 6, 2009 3:15 PM CDT reply actions
Well...
whatever his reasons, I simply choose to respect his wishes and not divulge what was said. Can’t believe it spawned this huge “discussion” here today.
Um
CW – I count 48 posts by you to this one discussion thread in a 5 hour period. Your incredulity at the huge discussion that was spawned today seems a little funny. ;)
That being said I started out agreeing with you that I don’t think the contents of the lunch should have been shared…however my opinion changed as I read more and thought more about Mr Kahn.
He IS a smart cookie. He encouraged Love to continue to tweet even after he broke the news about McHale’s firing. He doesn’t seem oblivious to modern communication channels nor old fashioned in their usage.
i think he wanted to let the people feel special and he also knew it would get out to the internet eventually.
I also am greatly enjoying the Kahn era. I think he’s trying to be more open, and also not stupid enough to let anything loose that could hurt the team if other GMs found out about it. So I probably would have respected his stated wishes, but I don’t think he really thought the things he said would not be more broadly shared.
And like many who have commented, I wish I had been there. :)
Well, he said other things that could possibly hurt his image if they got out.
Albeit, mostly just quips and/or witty comments. But so far it does not appear that they’ve been posted by anyone. So, I think there is merit to him not wanting to get quoted about what he said.
What he is doing is no different than a politician
putting up a trial balloon. Give a little info, give people some say, and prepare them ahead of time so you don’t get destroyed when you make your next move.
I was there
Kahn had a Diet Coke, with no ice! Then he got a refill – and the kicker is he asked for ice in his refill! What does it all mean? Also, I swore a saw a 2nd Kahn on the grassy knoll! Sorry guys, that’s all I can say.
by Brian Fantana II on Aug 6, 2009 4:04 PM CDT reply actions
Wow
One of the few times a Hoopus board is like reading a Strib board. Let’s close this up already!
"Come on Eddie, let's get serious."
I think it was for people on the fence...
My co-ticket holder was on the fence and we both got invited. Unfortunately, he’s bailing out. He’s been a ticket holder for 8 years and just feels like he cant go through this rebuild again. Kahn is basically saying that they’re not going to win many games and that its not the most important thing. (Which I agree with by the way). But thats not good enough for my buddy. So he’s not renewing. I’m going to pick up his tix as I’m buying into it. Maybe I’m a sucker.
Also, if anyone wants in…I’ve got good seats at a really cheap price. I need at least 1 more guy. :-)
Time to buy not sell!
I’m from Chicago, a huge Bulls fan and have been fascinated by the Wolve’s changes and the Rubio pick. For what it is worth if I lived in MN I would buy now, not sell. Despite my criticism of the Rubio pick I like what Kahn is doing. You were going no where with McHale. McHale blew a once in a lifetime opportunity to build a championship team around Garnett. He killed you with the Joe Smith problem. He also made multiple horrible trades. Kahn is bold, honest and has a vision. Buy, don’t sell.
Comments For This Post Are Closed
Secondary Sidebar
User Tools
Related FanPosts on Canis Hoopus
FanPosts
Community blog posts and discussion.
Certain photos copyright © 2012 by Associated Press or Getty Images. Any commercial use or distribution without the express written consent of Associated Press and Getty Images is strictly prohibited.
