Blount Will Be Waived or Traded
by TimAllen on Sep 23, 2009 3:32 PM CDT
49 comments
From this article on ESPN:
The second-highest paid player on the Minnesota Timberwolves will not be welcome at training camp. Instead, center Mark Blount will stay home after the Wolves gave his agent permission to seek a trade.
Blount, acquired from Miami in mid-August for Quentin Richardson, is due to make $7.962,500 this season in the last year of his six-year, $42 million contract. But with Minnesota in full rebuilding mode, general manager David Kahn told ESPN.com Wednesday that the club has given Blount's agent, Mark Bartlestein, permission to seek out a trade.
Blount spent the past two seasons with the Miami Heat after playing the previous year and a half for Minnesota. Kahn was candid right from the start about moving ahead without Blount, announcing the day after he acquired him that he hoped to re-trade the 33-year-old for a player or players with similar expiring contracts.
Minnesota has veterans Blount ($7.9 million), Brian Cardinal ($6.75 million) and Antonio Daniels ($6.6 million) coming off the cap in the summer of 2010, when Minnesota will be far under the salary cap with Al Jefferson ($13M), Ryan Gomes ($4.2 million) and Ramon Sessions ($4 million) the only high-salaries veterans on the payroll.
Blount, a seven-footer often criticized for his inability to rebound on a consistent, productive basis, had his best season statistics-wise in 2006-07 when he averaged 12.3 points and 6.2 rebounds while starting 81 of 82 games for Minnesota.
Blount appeared in only 20 games for the Heat last season, and Kahn took some criticism when he sapped the Wolves' backcourt depth by trading Richardson for him six weeks ago. But since then, Kahn has signed guards Sasha Pavlovic and Ramon Sessions to add depth in the backcourt behind Damien Wilkins and rookie Wayne Ellington. The minutes at backup center that Blount would have competed for will instead go to Ryan Hollins, the free agent signee from Dallas.
If Bartlestein cannot find a taker for Blount in a trade over the course of the preseason, the likely next step would be for the sides to negotiate a buyout.
Think we will find any takers? Or will Blount wind up being cut? I think we all knew this was going to happen eventually, but there was recent speculation that he could play a few minutes for us. This ends that, I would guess. Personally, I don't know what we could get for him that will be worth anything more than the cap space we'd get by cutting him.
0 recs |
49 comments
Email
Print
Comments
Do you think the Rockets would be interested?
by KGMN on Sep 23, 2009 3:46 PM CDT reply actions 0 recs
no
"Come on Eddie, let's get serious."
by biggity2bit on Sep 23, 2009 4:25 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
The Rockets don't have any real center. (Other than Yao)
by KGMN on Sep 23, 2009 4:41 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Right
so that’s why they’ll trade their cheap, good players to the T-Wolves for someone making $8 million to utterly and truly suck. Having a 7’ dude on the team is that important.
Your friendly neighborhood Dream Shake mod.
by Only_A_Lad on Sep 23, 2009 5:07 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
I don't quite understand.
Brent Barry and Brian Cook are cheap, good players?
by KGMN on Sep 23, 2009 5:13 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Barry's probably retiring
and, as shocking as this is, I’d rather have either than Blount. Barry was decent last year. Cook was terrible, , and there’s always the chance he gets his shot back and goes back to being halfway alright.
Your friendly neighborhood Dream Shake mod.
by Only_A_Lad on Sep 23, 2009 7:57 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
You'd want a retired player over Mark Blount?
by KGMN on Sep 23, 2009 8:10 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
They've got
Some 29 year old 7’ rookie from Australia who’s most likely going to play center for them. Guy’s got a lot more upside than Blount at a fraction of the cost.
"Come on Eddie, let's get serious."
by biggity2bit on Sep 23, 2009 9:17 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
David Anderson
Way way better than Blount
by easeus on Sep 23, 2009 9:20 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
I didn't know he was a 7 footer because it says he's a forward everywhere.
by KGMN on Sep 23, 2009 9:49 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
He has played his Euro and International career as a C
Judd: "...I've since watched some Steven Seagal movies and I realise that pressure points are no laughing matter.".
by Auswolf on Sep 24, 2009 5:05 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Well, he’s 6’-11", but what’s an inch among giants?
"Come on Eddie, let's get serious."
by biggity2bit on Sep 24, 2009 8:32 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Yes
because Blount is worth less than nothing.
Your friendly neighborhood Dream Shake mod.
by Only_A_Lad on Sep 24, 2009 3:52 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Do you think anybody will be interested?
no
by PoohRubio on Sep 23, 2009 4:26 PM CDT reply actions 0 recs
Maybe
if Kahn would be willing to take on a longer contract – someone looking to dump salary for next year’s free agency maket. I don’t see that happening – it goes against everything he has done so far, but that is the only way I see anyone wanting this overpaid and underachieving center. Not sure why he traded for him in the first place. There was a difference in salary between Q and Blount – do the Wolves hold the exemption???
by Hoping For a Miracle..Expecting Failure on Sep 23, 2009 5:00 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
I didn't think anybody would be interested the first time they traded him.
Never say never.
by pagingstanleyroberts on Sep 23, 2009 4:36 PM CDT reply actions 0 recs
I wouldn't expect any gratuitous sex or violence in this trade.
This is Chopper Dave's made for TV movie, Blades Of Vengeance. See, he's a chopper pilot by day, but by night he fights crime as a werewolf... YEAH!
by Kevin Loves McHale's Navy on Sep 23, 2009 7:18 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Oh, Peaceful Fountains Of Desire.
No Pussy Galore?
No Holly Goodhead?
Who’ll take Plenty O’Toole?
Die Another Day.
by levi_mn on Sep 23, 2009 10:37 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Cunning Kahn
He tells the agent to bring in trade offers. Kahn won’t have to spend a ton of time (and credibility) calling up every team in the league and trying to drum up some business.
I wonder what parameters Kahn gave the agent, as far as players who might be included in a deal.
Ah heck, it will all be bottom fishing anyways. Is one sucker (i.e. carp) better than another? I do not intend to spend any further mental energy or time on possible Blount trades.
I am relieved that Blount will not, repeat not, wear a Wolves uniform this season.
by levi_mn on Sep 23, 2009 7:12 PM CDT reply actions 0 recs
Parameter: The player who comes in has an expiring contract
"I think he can still play" - Kevin Pritchard on Juwan Howard
by Norsktroll on Sep 23, 2009 8:28 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Thin down front
I was not looking forward to Blount’s return, either, but his absence will leave us undermanned in the front court. Al is returning from a major injury. Many feel he is not a true center. Hollins is basically untested as a major rotation player. Love is also too small to be a regular center. Pecherov and Cardinal are not true centers, either. Talk small ball all you want, the champion Lakers could put three skilled near 7 footers on the floor with Kobe. We can’t. Size still is important in this league, and the Wolves need more of it.
by ogishkemuncie on Sep 23, 2009 8:28 PM CDT reply actions 0 recs
Then
Throw a D-League-r a bone. We’re about youth and growth, not retreads who are overpriced and may have a questionable attitude and/or work ethic.
"Come on Eddie, let's get serious."
by biggity2bit on Sep 23, 2009 9:19 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
"skilled" beiing the key word here
While I agree this team has had a length deficit ever since KG left town, the last thing we need is a 7-foot sleepwalker to eat up minutes. I don’t like Love at Center either, but he’d be waaaaay more effective in that slot than Blount. Heck, I’ll take Cardinal over Blount for some minutes at Center. At least he cares.
by Rascal Flatts on Sep 23, 2009 9:25 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Luckily for you then
That this wont be an issue in the next couple of years and we can probably address that by the time it comes into play.
by Mplax on Sep 23, 2009 9:29 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Adios Blount
Won’t get Value for you anyway..Hasbeen. has nothing to offer to any team in the league.
by TonyO on Sep 23, 2009 9:32 PM CDT reply actions 0 recs
never liked him
Ever since one of those middling post 2004 years when I saw Crunch go to Blount for a high five and Blount looked at Crunch disdainfully and Crunch had to withdraw his hand, er, paw.
YOU DON’T LEAVE CRUNCH HANGING.
Still perplexed that we tried to play “Flip This House” with him in the first place.
by Rasho Revolution on Sep 23, 2009 11:55 PM CDT reply actions 0 recs
Totally agree
That is NOT cool. You don’t diss Crunch. May be he thought he wasn’t declawed or something…..
by Rascal Flatts on Sep 24, 2009 12:01 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
He'll be waived
Who would be stupid enough to trade for him anyway…..
Oh.
Judd: "...I've since watched some Steven Seagal movies and I realise that pressure points are no laughing matter.".
by Auswolf on Sep 24, 2009 5:06 AM CDT reply actions 0 recs
If I were another team and I was interested in Blount
I’d wait for the Wolves to waive him, then try to sign him to a vet min contract. I guess they could see a trade for him as a way to get rid of junky players or contracts, but I’d guess he’ll sign somewhere for a vet min contract after the Wolves have waived him.
by Biff Cooper on Sep 24, 2009 8:54 AM CDT reply actions 0 recs
Agree he'll be waived.
Is there any team in any sport that buys out more worthless players/contracts then the t-wolves?
by Heggiebaby on Sep 24, 2009 9:11 AM CDT reply actions 0 recs
He'll be waived...
but I think that’s what Kahn has in mind. The Wolves press release says they “have provided permission for Blount’s agent to seek a roster spot with a different team.” So the ESPN article isn’t quite right in specifying only trades. I think the amount that another team is willing to pay Blount affects his buyout negotiation with the Wolves. If no one takes him, he’ll want the full buyout. If someone will pay him $1 million (for example), then a buyout somewhere between $0 and $1 million off of his remaining contract is a win/win for Blount and the Wolves.
by Madison Dan on Sep 24, 2009 10:04 AM CDT reply actions 0 recs
This is the one move I truly didn't get...
Blount for Richardson didn’t really make any sense to me at the time. I believe we saved a modest amount (less than $1mil), but someone correct me if I’m wrong. As far as waiving him, not so sure I agree.
Mark Blount has one NBA skill, and one NBA skill alone…he’s a 7 footer that can space the floor and hit a jumper. The only other big we had on the roster that could do that was Songaila. Now that he’s gone, keeping Blount made a bit more sense. Guess I was wrong about that too.
We all knew the endgame was to get the payroll down and free up space for next year. I just have never seen it done so incrementally over the course of what, like 10,000 trades this summer.
"I'm gonna make you cry...I'm gonna make you cry and dip my cookie in your tears!!!"
by mutleyil on Sep 24, 2009 11:08 AM CDT reply actions 0 recs
QRich - MBlount =
$9.35 – $7.96 = $1.39 million in savings. That’s a pretty nice discount on a player (both QRich and Blount) that the team was always going to waive/buyout.
According to the official “i love Khan” flowchart, the 3 players the wolves traded for QRich were set to make a combined $7.64 million this season, with Telfair making $2.7 million in 2010. So since Blount’s salary is very similar to the combined salaries of Madsen, Smith, and Telfair, the wolves essentially
bought out Madsen, Smith, and Telfair for $7.96, which represents a savings of about $2.5 million in 2010. We received no assets for them, which probably speaks more about their value throughout the league than Khan’s skills as a GM.
by littleboxes on Sep 24, 2009 3:50 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
That may really reflect those players’ value throughout the league, but they represented a load of minutes here and we replaced them with …er… nothing. I propose to you that if, prior to this offseason, someone suggested simply releasing Madsen, Telfair and Smith and getting nothing in return, you would have considered them crazy. Now, its apparently business as usual or even prudent business. The NBA is crazy and its the twists and turns of the salary cap that makes it so. Of course, we are not the only team that operates in this way.
by ogishkemuncie on Sep 24, 2009 4:37 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Not Crazy…
but rather extreme. They all are players Kahn had inherited. To him they represented the old regime and taking up minutes of ‘his’ players, whoever that may be.
by swheatle on Sep 24, 2009 7:12 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Smith has value
Maybe not as much as his contract but he’s worth a roster spot. I would have advocated for cutting Madsen and Telfair and getting nothing back.
by DJL44 on Sep 25, 2009 12:19 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
If Blount signs with someone else, Wolves save $$$
I’ve forgotten where I saw that (STrib?), and there were no details. I think the Wolves don’t have to pay whatever amount he make on another team.
Grin…notice, I didn’t say “earn on another team”.
by levi_mn on Sep 24, 2009 5:35 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Might go somewhere in a trade
Maybe there’s a team with a couple injured or unusable players the Wolves can trade Blount for and save a half a million. About the only scenario that makes sense.
by Rumblebee on Sep 24, 2009 11:36 AM CDT reply actions 0 recs
Insurance may pay salary of injured players...
so a team would save money by not trading them.
by Zev on Sep 24, 2009 6:40 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
I read it as
a parent saying to their upset child “Go ahead, run away if you want to.”
Child gets the go ahead to blow off some steam, but ultimately nothing will come of it because he has nowhere to go.
by John Doe on Sep 24, 2009 7:49 PM CDT reply actions 0 recs
It really depends...
On how much they’d have to pay him in a buyout. They haven’t really bought anyone out since Ratliff, even last year when they kept Booth on the roster instead of buy him out and ended up cutting Chris Richard.
by pagingstanleyroberts on Sep 25, 2009 6:16 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.
