Wolves Trade Songaila and Brown to New Orleans
by TonyO on Sep 9, 2009 3:59 PM CDT
Email
PrintThe moves of Kahn continue. From Adrian Wojnarowski of yahoo.com
The New Orleans Hornets have traded Antonio Daniels and a [2014] second-round draft pick to the Minnesota Timberwolves for Bobby Brown and Darius Songaila, a league source told Yahoo! Sports on Wednesday afternoon.
The trade removes about $1.3 million off the Hornets’ payroll. Brown played well for New Orleans in the 2008 Las Vegas summer league.
Corroborated by Marc Stein at ESPN.com
163 comments
|
0 recs |
Do you like this story?
Comments
Well this takes away the effect of signing Sessions to our Salary Cap next season at it sheds his 2010-11 Player option from our list of committed salaries. We take on payroll this year and have our backup veteran PG.
New Orleans get’s a better distribution of dollars as they have Darren Collison to backup Chris Paul and now get some front court depth in Songaila and a cheaper 3rd PG in Brown versus Daniels.
Solid trade I must admit. Knowing that both Rubio and Sessions would count towards the Cap next summer, this improves our Free Agency position if Milwaukee decides to match or not.
Interesting
I don’t think it matters greatly because Minnesota won’t have much salary cap room to play with when you factor in Rubio’s cap hold. I think Kahn did it to save money long term myself, and I can’t figure out a way to put it otherwise.
Should be interesting to see what happens though. I think Milwaukee will work on a trade that will allow them to attempt to match Sessions. But, at the very least, this is still interesting.
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.....
I think you're wrong
Even with Rubio’s cap hold ($3 million) we should have a lot of cap space. Maybe not max space, but plenty to facilitate trades and sign some of the 2nd tier guys.
Okay
Look at this site and tell me I’m wrong. I understand your point; I’ve looked at the salary for the Wolves next year.
The only way they have real salary cap room is if Sessions contract ends up being matched by Milwaukee.
Look at the Wolves salary here.
Say whatever you want, but the Wolves will have cap room depending on where the cap number drops to. But, it depends on how much salary the Wolves have.
If the Wolves have Sessions, the Wolves may be eliminated from having cap room by exceptions (you can’t utilize the MLE & BiAnnual Exception and still have cap room), the cap hold from Rubio, AND the draft picks will factor in. (In case you’re wondering, any 2nd round player doesn’t factor in at all here. They have no cap holds whatsoever.)
So, depending on what happens with Sessions, the first round pick of the Wolves, and the Rubio cap hold combined with the dropping cap, I don’t think it’s incredibly likely that the Wolves will have cap room. But, if Sessions isn’t around, it’s all about where the cap number is set and what the contracts are on the Wolves by the time July 1 rolls around.
There is a lot of time between now & then. I just suggest holding on significant cap room talk until all the details are known.
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.....
2010-11
$23.6 Million
Options to retain
-Brewer
-Pecherov
-Gomes
Rubio Cap Hold ($3 Million) + Draft Pick Cap Holds (?? – Guess – $4 Million) + Sessions if not Matched ($4 Million) + (minimum contracts to fill out the roster) = $13 Million
The Wolves would then have $36 Million committed to the Salary Cap and if they decline all the options, even a low cap estimate of $50 Million gives them $14 Million to play with.
awwww man...
that hurts my feelings: http://www.canishoopus.com/pages/contract-info
www.canishoopus.com
Do you have still the whole league up in a spreadsheet so I can update my link to it?
I only have the last year linked at my site now.
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.....
Nevermind wyn
I just found it.
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.....
And for the record
The thing I dislike most about your google spreadsheets is that new people don’t understand them. They work wonderfully, as you know, and when someone understands them I use them as a reference.
The problem I always have is that I’m not sure what people understand or don’t. I don’t want to make anything too complicated at the start.
But, it’s still an incredible resource. I’m thankful, myself, that you do do it.
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.....
Thank you!
An extremely thoughtful compliment, I greatly appreciate it PG!
And, if you DO have anything you’d recommend changing, I’m always open to suggestion.
www.canishoopus.com
Correct me if I am wrong, but
if Rubio signed a new contract with no buyout…is there still a cap hold next summer? I can understand the hold this summer, but I know he doesn’t count against our actual cap number during the season this year. Not sure which rule makes it come back on after the season.
by TheEvilProfessor on Sep 10, 2009 7:56 AM CDT up reply actions
Cap FAQs go over that
The whole ‘summer window when the cap holds apply’ thing is in ’em.
The scale amount is excluded from the team salary on the date he signs a non-NBA contract or the first day of the regular season, whichever is later. The scale amount goes back onto the team salary on the following July 1 or when his non-NBA contract ends, whichever is earlier. In other words, these cap holds are removed for players playing elsewhere during the regular season only.
— Larry Coon’s
That's a very good trade.
Except for the fact that we have 3 solid PGs now. We give up one of our PFs in Songaila, he’s a good one, but we don’t need so many.
Sounds like Sessions is going to start at SG
with this trade.
Nice
Clearing Songaila’s option for next year is huge. $4.8 million could be huge.
Daniels isn’t much of a PG. He’s more of an athletic combo type guy. He’ll be nice to have so that how we can see how that kind of player could work in our system given that we’ll be taking John Wall first overall next year.
I can’t wait to see the bashing…the Wolves get another PG!!!
NO JOHN WALL!!
Timberwolves - NBA champs 2013!
(used with permission - Wolf in MO)
by frankenhoops on Sep 10, 2009 8:15 AM CDT up reply actions
Yeah -
we can have Pg/SG and run all day & night!!!
Timberwolves - NBA champs 2013!
(used with permission - Wolf in MO)
by frankenhoops on Sep 10, 2009 11:58 AM CDT up reply actions
You wouldn't take John Wall if we got the 1st pick next year?
I would in a heartbeat, if he’s still the clearly-established best player at that point. If Wall is really a franchise-changer, like so many people say, we’d be idiots to pass on him, no matter who we already have at the point.
Then we’d spend the rest of the summer reading about blockbuster trades involving Wolves point guards. Rubio’s rights and something else for Iguodala! Flynn for Rudy Fernandez!
Blake Griffin?
Trying to think of a good example, and this came to mind. Would you take Blake Griffin with the #1 if you already have Love/Jefferson? I would have. But it comes down to how big the drop off is between #1 and #2. This year the difference between #1 and #2 was fairly large. Next year it may be closer, we don’t know how the next season is going to play out.
by Cedarpenguin on Sep 14, 2009 10:29 AM CDT up reply actions
Hypothetically
I might. I just have no desire to take Wall right now. Now if a triumvate of disaster happens and all of our current decent/potentially great PG’s fall apart/blow up, then I would have to consider it. I am a believer in taking BPA, but I really hope that between now and then the BPA that falls to Wolves is a SF with Ray Allen range and CP3 handle. But that is probably hoping for WWAAAAYYYY to much, isn’t it??
Timberwolves - NBA champs 2013!
(used with permission - Wolf in MO)
by frankenhoops on Sep 15, 2009 1:45 PM CDT up reply actions
Not if you are drinking
Soarin’ Strawberry-Lemonade Kool-Aid!
by TheEvilProfessor on Sep 15, 2009 1:48 PM CDT up reply actions
I believe I'm sloshing
Timberwolves - NBA champs 2013!
(used with permission - Wolf in MO)
by frankenhoops on Sep 15, 2009 1:50 PM CDT up reply actions
Don't forget
Favors (as of now) is the second BPA and would be a pretty nice fit in terms of positional need AND drafting the BPA. We need an athletic 4/5 guy to play next to Love and Big Al (and who knows, maybe Big Al doesn’t come back or Love proves to be a career 6th man). I’m not saying which position he should be (it all depends on matchup), but we need an athletic 4/5. I know we have bigger holes at the 2 and 3, but if the BPA is Favors then we take him or trade down for equivalent value. But Favors has been compared to Dwight Howard…. I wouldn’t pass that up for Evan Turner and insert slightly above average player here. Of course, a lot of things can and will change from now until draft day and Wall, Favors, and Turner could all flop!
But if Wall is far and away the BPA, we draft him and worry about it later (or trade down for value equal to his potential).
Crazy off-season
Every time there is a super long analysis of our current roster…….we turn and make a trade! haha. I’m happy with this one though, Songaila and Brown are nothing special and Antonio Daniels is legit.
Favorite Comedians: Mike Birbiglia, Doug Benson, Daniel Tosh, Delmon Young in Left Field.
Like the move...
Cancels out the salary added to the 10-11 payroll if Sessions comes, and it gives the Wolves a guy who could play 1 or 2. Daniels isn’t a great player but gives them some versatility.
by pagingstanleyroberts on Sep 9, 2009 4:21 PM CDT reply actions
Nah. Color me totally confused.
Of the players received from Washington for Miller and Foye, I thought Songaila was the one who could be relied on for some decent contributions.
Kahn needs solid big men. Pecherov, Hollis, and Blount as the big men in reserve? Ouch. But here he his fooling around with end of the bench guards.
OK, sure Daniels may be better than Brown, but worth giving up Songaila? Maybe it was just the money. And as a 2 for 1 trade, a roster spot.
Maybe he could've...
But aren’t he and Cardinal redundant on this roster? Cardinal’s listed as an inch shorter and 3 lbs. lighter. This is a salary dump and roster trim, but Daniels is better than Brown or Atkins are. He’s not that far removed from being the 3rd guard on perennial playoff teams in Washington.
by pagingstanleyroberts on Sep 9, 2009 4:36 PM CDT up reply actions
Daniels is 34 and prolly pissed
that he won’t have a chance at a ring…
http://blog.nola.com/hornetsbeat/2009/03/exwizard_daniels_pefers_winnin.html
But he was traded once for Mike James…
Giving up Songaila? Getting rid of his option for 2010-11 was the whole point of the deal.
This deal has relatively little to do with talent because the parties involved don’t have that much. I’m glad because this will ensure minutes to Pecherov and Hollins. We won’t have Songaila to take their minutes. Let’s see what the younger guys can do.
Wow
Somebody took Songaila! Nice. And we get a 2014 2nd rounder? Wow.
We can get under the cap next Summer by $20M without too much trouble.
And we still have two large expirings in Blizzy and Janitor and 2 nice mid-range contracts with attractive buyouts this year and next in Chucky and Gomes.
I like where this is going.
(678): Words of Wisdom: ordering a pitcher of whiskey cokes, putting a straw in it, and calling it your drink is not socially acceptable
Heh heh
From ESPN’s profile of Daniels:
Most similar at age: Kevin Ollie
Delaying hope for a Rubio Revolucion since roughly 11:43 p.m. on September 1st, 2009.
Three Cheers for Papa Glen/ Kahn
The Wolves add about 900K in the salary in 2010 to clear nearly 4.5 Million dollars in 2010 Cap Space.
Three Cheers for Kahn for making such a smart deal. This trade doesn’t really help this year at all. Although Daniels can offer something from a leadership perspective.
Trading Songaila
tells me that Kahn wants to play Gomes more at the 4…and less at the 3.
by TheEvilProfessor on Sep 9, 2009 4:37 PM CDT reply actions
Unless he is going to be trying
to get both Love and Al more time at the 4 and let Hollins, Pecherov and (HAHAHAHA) Blount take up more minutes at the 5.
by TheEvilProfessor on Sep 9, 2009 4:38 PM CDT up reply actions
Don't forget Cardinal...
I’m not sure Songaila was going to take his minutes anyway, and they’re very similar physically (besides the hair).
by pagingstanleyroberts on Sep 9, 2009 4:40 PM CDT up reply actions
I knew I was forgetting someone...
I had the impression that The Custodian was Kahn’s choice to replace Madsen as team cheerleader this year.
Don't you mean Rambis?
Rambis wants to play Gomes at the 4?
not sure yet
whether this was a move wanted by Kahn before the Rambis hire…or after. I could see it both ways. Doesn’t take a genius to figure out that Gomes numbers are better as an undersized 4 than a slower 3.
by TheEvilProfessor on Sep 10, 2009 7:59 AM CDT up reply actions
Really?
Most people I read on these boards are convince the other way, especially on defense. Gomes can no way guard 4s.
by Blond Ricky on Sep 10, 2009 10:27 AM CDT up reply actions
Here is my breakdown of Gomes
As a backup against other backups. Gomes is a servicable SF. His stats are the PF are skewed by having him play as a starter and getting posterized by more talented players at the position. If the question were which backup spot is he better at…it would be PF.
2007/2008:
SF Net PER 1.0
PF Net PER -1.3
2008/2009
SF Net PER -5.6
PF Net PER -3.9
He went from 26% of team min at SF to 34% of team min at SF. It caused a 6.6 PER drop off. While at the PF he still had a drop off, but if you look at the numbers…it was all on the offensive end.
Not a huge difference, but it just goes to show you that the more he plays backup…the better he looks. It’s why it scares the hell out of me when people mention him as the starting SF. It might as well be brewer because at least our second unit will be able to hang then…even if our first can’t…yet.
by TheEvilProfessor on Sep 10, 2009 10:48 AM CDT up reply actions
Kahn strikes again!
My head is almost starting to spin. Is Daniels an expiring contract?
I like this for this season, though. The Timberwolves now have what looks like a real NBA backcourt. I think after these last two moves (Sessions and Daniels) we’re looking at a potential 30-game winner this year.
Trade breakdown...actual numbers
We get 2014 2nd rounder and 6.6M 1 yr contract (Daniels)
NO gets Brown ($736,420, 1 yr) and Songaila (4,526,000, 2 yr)
by TheEvilProfessor on Sep 9, 2009 5:00 PM CDT reply actions
that's an extra
1,337,580 this year, but we lose 4,818,000 next year.
by TheEvilProfessor on Sep 9, 2009 5:05 PM CDT up reply actions
Kahn should have gottten a 1st rounder
for taking out NOLA’s refuse (note: I didn’t say garbage or trash).
come on, that's just greedy
We got rid of a Songaila AND Brown! For a pick and a guy we can actually use.
At the very least Daniels could be a good mentor to Flynn and Sessions. At best, a contender may want/need him as an injury replacement come the deadline.
Remind me why
Kahn keeps acquiring big expiring contracts? The Wolves already had a basketfull.
At $6.6M, or some portion thereof, I’d say Daniels probably won’t be courted by anyone at the trading deadline.
Yeah, it'd have to be a buyout
But even then, that saves the Wolves money and Songaila’s contract for next year. I agree that cap space for the sake of cap space isn’t a sound policy, but if they can get somebody better than Songaila for what they were paying Songaila (which isn’t a stretch by any means), then I’d rather have his deal off the books. He was a redundant player taking up cap space and a roster spot.
by pagingstanleyroberts on Sep 9, 2009 5:30 PM CDT up reply actions
Why not?
He is a perfect vet for a playoff run assuming he’s healthy. Plays hard defense, has playoff experience, and his contract is EXPIRING. He’s a rental.
You’d honestly rather have Songaila, a rich man’s Mark Madsen, for two years over Daniels for one?
I don't think the Hornets wanted Songaila...
.. so much as they wanted the $2.6 million in savings this year when the luxury tax is included.
I don’t quite grasp your point. I believe that the luxury tax kicks in at $69M and the Hornets are now at $66.86M. Actually, with this trade, the Wolves are flirting with luxury at $68.79M
FWIW, Kahn could have just traded Bobby for the 2nd round pick and the trade exception that the Hornets had remaining on Tyson Chandler.
$68.79M???
Where is that figure coming from? I’m looking at the salary info and even if we get Sessions we are fare below that number. Am I missing someone or something or did you just mess up the number?
The luxury tax limit is at 69.92 million
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.....
About $62M
http://spreadsheets.google.com/pub?key=r0EIACYJtq4Wgjl-ZmYzRug&gid=19
Already updated with Daniels. NIce work guys.
(678): Words of Wisdom: ordering a pitcher of whiskey cokes, putting a straw in it, and calling it your drink is not socially acceptable
Be careful using the trade machine
for cap numbers, they don’t always add up. Look at the Hornets total on top, then add the individual players on your own, they don’t match. Same with the Wolves, thought it had something to do with cap holds, but that would not explain the Hornets being too low in their calculation.
Disagree completely
Obviously Daniels isn’t a player that teams would covet, but his expiring allows us to cut Blount (if we want) and still have enough expirings (Cardinal and Daniels) to create a package for a big time wing player if the deal arrives.
I could envision a lot of guys getting dumped at some point depending on how their teams perform this year and their team dynamics. Kevin Martin, Iguodala, Deng, Marvin Wiliams, Gerald Wallace. We’ve got enough expirings now to package with our future picks to make almost any kind of deal that might arise.
Or…Shedding Daniels at the end of the year also puts us far enough under the cap (vs. keeping Songaila) that we could outright absorb all but the biggest contracts in the league. That could prove quite useful. Say Danilo Galinari or Wilson Chandler really look great this year for the Knicks. The Knicks get the o.k. from LeBron and Bosh that both want to come, but they need to shed Eddy Curry to make it happen financially. We eat Curry’s contract for Galinari.
Are you kidding?
I’ve seen at least two people wondering how it wasn’t the Wolves giving up that 2nd rounder here….
This Trade Broken Down
We trade a more productive player (With Limited Value) with a worse contract for a generally non productive expiring contract. People moaning about Carney now Songalia. I’d hate to see the reaction if we traded a productive player. Songalia’s a terrible rebounder, a medicore defender, and a pretty good shooter. He in theory could be a 9th man on a good team. He had no great long-term value here.
by Jose Cordoba on Sep 9, 2009 10:58 PM CDT up reply actions
Ignoring financial condiserations we have traded Foye, Miller, BBrown and two 2nd round picks for Daniels, Pecherov, Atkins, Wilkins, rights to Rubio, one 2nd round pick.
Yes...but....
we’ve kept our cap space for next year while also signing Sessions and Hollins. Without all the trading, those 2 would have cut into our cap number next year.
Kahn did a good job improving the financial aspects of these deals..
. The original trade was applauded by most, since then Kahn has subtracted about $6 million of the obligations he took on after the Wizards deal (assuming Atkins is waived). One of Bill Simmons recent criticisms was the contracts the Wolves took on in the Foye/Miller trade – doesn’t look that bad now.
(And defensive ability in the backcourt)
The Kevin Ollie comparison is apt enough. Daniels is if anything a better ‘hardnosed defensive veteran.’
but I wonder
just how much positive energy Antonio will bring to the Wolves. He seems like a great guy, but there he was getting playing time on a competitive 50 win team, now is shipped to a non-competitive team where he is primarily valued for his expiring contract. And at his age, he has no future with the Wolves.
Time will tell.
But he still will want to play well
to get another contract.
by TheEvilProfessor on Sep 10, 2009 8:35 AM CDT up reply actions
Sure. The old “contract year” canard.
So maybe he can beat out Atkins for playing time. But watching a team lose 50 games from the end of the bench will sap the enthusiasm of almost anyone not named Mark Madsen.
Shouldn't be hard
I don’t expect Atkins to be with the team, either through trade or the buyout. I don’t think we’ve stopped churning up the roster dross.
Sept 27th
Atkins and/or Wilkens can be traded in combination with other players.
October 13th and Kahn can burn off a Blount combo.
Churn is the word.
I just get a feeling that
there is going to be someone else traded with Aitkins…Can’t be wilkins, I think they keep daniels until the trading deadline. Who does that leave? Brewer, Gomes, Cardinal, Pecherov? I just get this feeling that there is a Aitkins & Gomes for someone deal. Simply because Aitkins isn’t guaranteed this year…and Gomes isn’t fully guaranteed for the next two. Send them both to a team over the luxury tax level both this year and next for someone? Either unused talent or reasonable expiring and picks?
by TheEvilProfessor on Sep 10, 2009 9:30 AM CDT up reply actions
Wolves talking with Celts about trade...
…for Atkins and Wilkens.
Not sure what could work and be valuable for both teams but at quick look, some combo of Tony Allen, JR Giddens, Scalabrine (maybe Celts use trade exceptions, throw in/exchange future draft pick).
Not a blockbuster but both teams balance rosters. Wolves deal PG to get SG and/or PF without sacrificing expirings, maybe save $ or improve future draft pick, etc and Celts get a 3rd PG they apparently are looking for
by PoohRichardson on Sep 10, 2009 5:47 PM CDT up reply actions
Scalabrine can make an open shot.
Could help spread the floor.
Allen is a dogged defender, and Giddens is only 24 or so with good athleticism.
As someone else pointed out on the TWolves blog site, however, there is a problem with this trade.
We would be exceeding the NBA limit on number of goofy looking white guys on the bench, with Veal Scalabrine and the Custodian.
Maddog had an exception to this limit, I am told, because he was considered part of the cheerleader contingent. So we can’t make the argument that Scalabrine takes Maddog’s slot — unless Brian takes some lessons in dancing and waving a towel.
We wouldn't be exceeding the limit.
Gingers have their own category.
I hate Pod Six. I don't even know why we have a Pod Six. Total suck pod.
by Kevin Loves McHale's Navy on Sep 10, 2009 8:18 PM CDT up reply actions
A couple of possible derivations...
#1
Wolves get Brian Cook (Hou), JR Giddens (Bos), Tony Allen (Bos)
Celtics get Chucky, Brent Barry (Hou), and James White (Hou)
Rockets get Wilkins and Scalabrine
#2
Wolves get Giddens, Allen, and Scalabrine
Celtics get Cook, Barry, and White
Rockets get Wilkins and Atkins
#3
Wolves get Barry, Cook, and White
Celtics get Wilkins and Atkins
Rockets get Giddens, Allen, and Scalabrine
There are many possibilities. Here are the things to know:
Scalabrine, Cook, Wilkins, and Atkins are similar in salary and wouldn’t have to be grouped with any teammates
Giddens/Allen and Barry/White (heh heh) have to be traded together because all teams are over the cap and salaries have to be fairly equal.
by pagingstanleyroberts on Sep 11, 2009 12:35 PM CDT up reply actions
I would be more inclined for the following deal
Wolves get: T Allen (Bos), Giddens (Bos) and Cook (Hou)
Celtics get: Barry (Hou), White (Hou) and Aitkins (Min)
Rockets get: Wilkins (Min) and Scalabrine (Hou)
Not sure who actually wants wilkins. Scalabrine seems like a Houston type player. Barry is a more experience SG to backup Ray Allen in Bos (Aitkins waived) and Min uses T Allen and B Cook as depth with Giddens as a prospect.
by TheEvilProfessor on Sep 11, 2009 1:01 PM CDT up reply actions
Scalabrine and Wilkins
Are not Houston type players to say the least. If you look at metrics like Wins Produced (WOW) (Which get more at what Morey looks for rather than PER)- it’s pretty clear both players have very little value.
by Jose Cordoba on Sep 11, 2009 1:15 PM CDT up reply actions
What about
Giddens and Allen? I have a hard time thinking the wolves make anything close to even steven without getting allen out of the deal (for a more talented SG for Flynn/Sessions to play with) plus Gidden for a prospect.
by TheEvilProfessor on Sep 11, 2009 1:25 PM CDT up reply actions
Wilkins to Boston makes more sense
Because they’d be more willing to take the cap hit considering their team.
by pagingstanleyroberts on Sep 11, 2009 2:20 PM CDT up reply actions
The only way
You’d trade Atkins contract for this mess is if you have a big opinion on JR Giddens. I really don’t. Allen’s blah- he’s not that young nor can he shoot from the outside. He’s a pretty good defender- but they’re are D-Leaguers probably worth more of a look.
by Jose Cordoba on Sep 11, 2009 2:30 PM CDT up reply actions
If Bos got both Willkins
and Aitkins, that might neutralize any cap hit for them. Or most of it. Who do you think they would give up though?
by TheEvilProfessor on Sep 11, 2009 2:29 PM CDT up reply actions
He wasn't going to get much playing time
Darren Collison is the backup and Devin Brown gets more time as a combo guard.
by pagingstanleyroberts on Sep 10, 2009 1:06 PM CDT up reply actions
I like it, I guess
But I hadn’t realized how bad Daniels was last year. Maybe injuries had soemthing to do with it, but he’s no spring chicken either. Still, he’s an improvement over BobbyB and if you can turn a 2 year deal (Songila) into a 1-year deal, it’s not bad.
If you think Sessions is getting 36 minutes and you think Flynn is getting 24 minutes, that leaves 36 mins in the backcourt. I’m not sure Daniels gets many minutes (I think at least at the start of the year most will go to Brewer and Ellington), but if you have injuries or foul trouble, he’ll be an asset (where BobbyB would have been a liability).
Finally, I agree with DougW that Daniels may be an attractive target. He was a role player on some very good Spurs teams and a decent Wizards team.
Random number
Assuming we waive Brewer and Pecherov after this year, then the wolves will have almost 25.5M for FA and draft picks next offseason.
by TheEvilProfessor on Sep 9, 2009 5:24 PM CDT reply actions
Is that before or after cap holds?
by pagingstanleyroberts on Sep 9, 2009 5:25 PM CDT up reply actions
before cap holds
The cap holds are going to depend on how many picks we have and in what slot they are.
I figure we probably have about 13-14M in FA money. That would allow us to offer a max contract for anyone who has been in the league for 6 years or less.
by TheEvilProfessor on Sep 9, 2009 5:35 PM CDT up reply actions
Why is Daniels' contract so high?
I know Seattle signed him to a huge contract, but he wasn’t considered great then, was he?
That deal came from the Wiz...
They signed him to replace Larry Hughes and was probably for the MLE.
by pagingstanleyroberts on Sep 9, 2009 5:25 PM CDT up reply actions
I don't mind the trade from a long term perspective
But it would be nice if he could’ve gotten a useful player.
Like Mark Blount and Damien Wilkins, for instance?
It must be time to start thinking about which free agent Kahn is going to pursue in 2010. To narrow the field, our Evil Professor calculates the WOlves will be able to offer a max contract to a player with no more than 6 years in the league.
none are worth sinking the franchise for
but if Kahn goes for Johnson, he can continue building the team out of matchsticks.
Deal isn't about players
Great long term financial move by wolves, also frees up a roster spot this year…
Other trades featuring Songalia and Brown
Here are some deals I would have done using Songalia and Brown before doing this deal:
From Phoenix: Sasha Pavlovic (4.9 mil/1 yr) and Alando Tucker (1 mil/1 yr)
Whoops...hit the post button instead of the preview button
Although I do think that would be a good deal…
I’ll get this internets thing figured out someday.
Rumor is...
That Pavlovic might come here anyway once the Suns buy him out.
by pagingstanleyroberts on Sep 9, 2009 6:25 PM CDT up reply actions
Where'd you hear that?
And is he any good that we would want him?
There's a thread on TWolvesBlog...
And Britt mentioned it in his post about Sessions.
by pagingstanleyroberts on Sep 9, 2009 6:33 PM CDT up reply actions
I don't like that move. Songaila is serviceable even on his 2 years remaining unlike Cardinal, Pecherov, Blount & Co. and could have been a good help.
It makes the Hornets stronger immediately and helps them to get rid of a bad deal they really can’t use anymore with a new good rookie PG to back up Paul. And for that he gets a pick long in the future and hopes to do something useful with the additional cap space – or maybe save the owner some money. Kahn shouldn’t start thinking about 2014 just yet :)
There's Gotta Be More To Life
Songaila is completely redundant with Cardinal
Career PER: 13.7 vs. 13.8
Career Reb%: 10.7 vs. 10.1
AST : 10.9 vs. 11.8
TO: 13.7 vs.15.0
TS%: 54.2 vs. 55.3
Cardinal is one inch shorter and three lbs. lighter.
by pagingstanleyroberts on Sep 9, 2009 6:41 PM CDT up reply actions
Cardinal was a
difference maker for us last year…..
by Rascal Flatts on Sep 9, 2009 8:25 PM CDT up reply actions
GREAT pickup
I went over to Washington’s page a while ago and posted something about Foye/Miller/Flip and they all said that Miller last year was a good comparison to AD when they had him. A guy who would go out every night and lay everything on the line for the team! I think we’re really going to like having this guy showing our young guys how to give it your all. Obviously he isn’t quite the talent that Miller is, but for everything Miller did last year, I’d almost say its a wash. I was actually looking at deals to get this guy, but didn’t think NO would eat Songaila or have any interest in Bobby Brown let alone include a second rounder in it. This actually might be the deal I like best so far. We save having to pay Songaila next year, get veteran leadership on an expiring deal, get a good locker room guy, get rid of Bobby Brown (I am so happy we will not have to see him try to prove himself again this year), and we get a guy who could play some minutes at the 2 for us when needed.
I’m happy. I am not a huge fan of the QRich trade (but let it be known that QRich for Blount was a great trade still). I am not a fan of the Etan Thomas and 2 2nd rounders (mostly cuz I feel that they could have been put to better use) for Contract and Wilkins, but this could change depending on how Contract is used. This trade though, this is good. We got rid of nothing for AD and a second rounder (probably a mid to late pick though). Basically, we traded 1.5M for 5M and a pick. That’s great no matter how you slice it.
Excellent
Getting rid of Songalia’s player option is good work. There are a lot of open questions about options and the cap, but I can get the Wolves down to roughly $32 million including Sessions AND the cap hold for Rubio, but NOT including cap holds for any 2010 first round picks. This means not picking up options for Brewer or Pecherov, and waiving Gomes so he only counts $1 million.
I agree that they are almost too thin in the front court now (I’m assuming Blount won’t play for the Wolves).
Um, no
Too old. What is the point? Dude will be 33 next year and he isn’t getting any healthier. We want to add guys like Manu 3 years from now at a bargain (which he won’t be since the Spurs are laying it all out there for the next 2-3 years to try and get TIMMY another ring).
Will he help us win more games next year? Yeah. Will the franchise be better off in 3 years? Hell no.
No offense, he would fit for a year or two maybe. I want the gold, not the rainbow.
(678): Words of Wisdom: ordering a pitcher of whiskey cokes, putting a straw in it, and calling it your drink is not socially acceptable
No offense, but why?
Salaries all expiring, essentially the same. Frees a roster spot for us. We get a guy who has a history of being a little flaky and lose 2 vets who play hard. We have no reason to play Hughes much and sure as hell aren’t signing him to an extension. Not sure the value of one big expiring exceeds that of 2 mid-range expirings. I don’t get it. At all, from either end.
(678): Words of Wisdom: ordering a pitcher of whiskey cokes, putting a straw in it, and calling it your drink is not socially acceptable
I truly have no idea.
I just made up a trade where we get an expiring contract which might help us get a star player although unlikely.
Another solid move by The Kahn.
Again succeeds in saving us money without buying out people or losing any real talent.
Songaila would have been the only expiring in the year that his contract was expiring: having one exp. 4mil contract does nothing for us. Having an extra 6.6mil exp. this year, with all the others we already have is definitly a lot better: again succeeds in working out a long term strategy instead of one move at a time.
The talent factor is almost non existant. I’d say it’s about even. We could have used Songaila and Brown, we will have equal usage for Daniels.
Kahn must have read my grief with the other trades. Again there’s thinking long term by adding a 2014 2nd round pick … Succeeds in adding some spice to the trade
Excellent
We got Rubio!
Welp, I have to say this is refreshing. Not only are trades fun, but Kahn actually seems to know what he’s doing and is aggressively making it happen! To rid us of Songaila’s salary next year, in essence replacing him with Sessions, was brilliant. We are well-poised to make some huge moves, now it just comes down to what Kahn does when he goes all-in. Makes you wish you could see the future just to see what the roster would look like in two years.
Jennings: F*** the Knicks, them n***** is always going to be weak.
Does anyone here have a real sense...
… at how close the Kings are to blowing it up and moving Martin? I’m not sure there’s a more logical young SG to pursue at this point and (as many have noted) he’d play nicely opposite Sessions and Flynn, and space the floor. They’re in a terrible place with salaries, and its only a matter of a year or two before they realize that Tyreke Evans is every bit a shooting guard. Instead of crossing our fingers and hoping to land some marquee FA with our growing cap space, what about eating one or two big, fat, crappy contracts and prying Martin from them? Someone talk me out of adding contracts.
Btw...
… I continue to like what Kahn is doing here. Eliminate redundancy, balance the roster, cut long-term financial liabilities, and push like hell to keep it going. I actually feel spoiled with a new roster move to read about and process every week. And I’ve almost never felt spoiled as a fan of this club.
I’m not sure, but I’ve been pondering this for a while now (including all the way in to work today!). Would the Kings honestly say no if you approached them with a deal like Flynn + Charlotte’s pick and an expiring to make it work (Cardinal?). I’m not so sure.. Martin’s only 26, but that team’s even farther back in the rebuilding process than the Wolves, so getting talent for him and saving $$ has to be tempting to them. I’d need assurance that he’s healthy, but, depending on the timing (would have to be after the trade deadline) I would think about it.
He may not do much other than score, but damn does he do that well. IMO, he’s exactly what we need from a scorer. He’ll kill you from outside, he’ll get to the line 8-10 times per game, he can create when necessary and he’s incredibly good at playing off the ball. Imagine moving for Martin, then drafting the best available swingman, let’s say Paul George, and rolling with the following lineup for the 2010 season:
Sessions
Martin
George
Love
Jefferson
With Rubio and Pekovic in the pipeline (not to mention Utah’s pick). Not too shabby..
So yeah, just illustrating a possible scenario so we can actually get a glimpse of what could be. I have to say I like it, and it’s cool that I actually have faith in Kahn to make the moves necessary to assemble such a team, as opposed to counting on boring offseasons consisting of one minor trade and overpaying for a vet to placate KG.
Jennings: F*** the Knicks, them n***** is always going to be weak.
I wouldn't want to give up Flynn for Martin.
I think Martin is highly overrated and is a classic case of good numbers on a bad team. I think Flynn could be a top-10 point guard in a couple of years. That’s not worth it to me.
You lost me.
A “classic case of good numbers on a bad team” doesn’t get to the line 10 times a game whlie simultaneously being one of the best 3pt shooters in the league. Martin is anything but a good numbers on a bad team guy. If anything, his ability to be so efficient on a bad team should be a positive indicator – imagine what he would do next to a real PG like Sessions and with a low-post threat like Al. It’s mind-boggling. I bet he could drop 28 ppg if we pushed the pace.
Don’t get me wrong, I want to watch Flynn, which I why I said I wouldn’t do any deal until after the trade deadline (more likely even later than that) so there’s plenty of time to evaluate him. Maybe we could even offer Sessions if Flynn blows up – he’s still 23 and I’m very confident he’s going to impress. Point is, Martin is quite possibly attainable given the assets we currently have.
Jennings: F*** the Knicks, them n***** is always going to be weak.
At some point during the season
we could end up offering our charlotte and Utah picks plus the proper combo of expirings and non-guaranteed (Gomes) and get him. That only works if they feel that Evans is a SG and want to keep the cheaper option at SG. Not a bad package if you want to jumpstart the rebuild.
by TheEvilProfessor on Sep 10, 2009 9:54 AM CDT up reply actions
Seems to me like they’d probably want more than that, but hey, we have plenty of assets to play around with so I’d hope Kahn would start out by lowballing teams.
On the flip side, another scenario is offering a similar package as above for Gerald Wallace, then taking the best big wing next year (Evan Turner anyone).
Again, I’m just illustrating one out of a multitude of possible scenarios, but I could see something like that happening as well, and again I would be very happy with it. Flynn/Sessions/Turner/Wallace on the wing would be an awesome running team with vastly improved D, all built on top of one of the best rebounding duos in the league. All of that on top of still having Rubio and Pek as possibilities just goes to show you how well the Wolves are positioned.
Jennings: F*** the Knicks, them n***** is always going to be weak.
Martin isn't very good on defense is he?
Obviously he makes up for it on the other end, but I was just wondering.
I don’t know what I would give up for him though, injuries might be an issue as someone said. I like Evan Turner (tho I have not seen him much…) so he would be nice.
That has Sacto giving up proven NBA talent for Flynn’s potential. Tough call.
On the other side, Kahn would be handing Sacto the backcourt of Evans and Flynn that he thought he was trading Miller and Foye for.
And ditto what TimAllen said. Right now, Flynn is the only Timberwolf I’m actually interested in watching.
That’s always the gamble.. if they hang on to Martin and never wind up competing, keeping him makes little sense as they will have to pay his somewhat large deal. If they’re confident they can rebuild quickly then it makes sense to keep him, but given their timeline, getting young talent and saving a bunch of $$ on his deal makes sense (at least to me).
And yeah, I’m really excited to watch Flynn. I wouldn’t think about a move like this until probably next summer, at which point we should have an idea of what we have in him. Also, I was just cobbling together a deal while trying to be fair. Remember, we may not think he’s worth Flynn, but Sac probably thinks he’s worth much more than we do (he is their best player, after all).
Jennings: F*** the Knicks, them n***** is always going to be weak.
It might be possible
to package Charlottes and Utah’s pick plus expirings for Martin. Doesn’t need to be Flynn.
by TheEvilProfessor on Sep 10, 2009 9:46 AM CDT reply actions
Kevin Martin
If Martin regains his old form, I doubt Sacto would be selling cheap. Unless Flynn blows up fast (and then why would we want to trade him), I wouldn’t see them having enough interest in trading an all-star caliber SG who’s returned to form. If Martin doesn’t come back strong, why would we want to give up Flynn for a plateaued SG with a big contract?
So…I don’t think Flynn would be in play for Martin.
by Blond Ricky on Sep 10, 2009 10:51 AM CDT up reply actions
sorry...
I was trying to point out the Flynn likely wouldn’t be part of that deal. Last comment messed that up.
by TheEvilProfessor on Sep 10, 2009 11:01 AM CDT up reply actions
The fact that they wouldn’t sell cheap is exactly why I put Flynn into the deal in the original scenario. This is assuming, obviously, that Flynn doesn’t look like a superstar, but rather a promising young piece that could tempt a team looking to save money and continue with the rebuild, and that Martin looks to return to form.
If Flynn looks like the next CP3, then obviously you don’t move him for anything other than a guy like CP3 himself.
Jennings: F*** the Knicks, them n***** is always going to be weak.
Flynn or Sessions would have to be a part of the deal
That said, it very well could be Sessions- he’s a very compelling fit next to Mr. Evans, especially once people in their front office figure out that Evans is an off-guard.
I'm a fan of your work
I do disagree about Evans being an Off-Guard. He’s just not that aware without the ball in his hands. This is why Memphis switched him last year.
I’m still confused as to Kahn’s vision of a Flynn/Evans backcourt- their seems to be some serious spacing issues here. This is why I’m confused why Sac-Town would trade Kevin Martin for Flynn.
Paging Pookey Guru???
And you don’t rebulid based on fit, you do it based on talent. If they decide to move Martin and Flynn is the best player offered, I imagine they wouldn’t turn it down due to spacing issues. After all, neither he or Evans is guaranteed to pan out, so you may as well stockpile as many lotto-caliber talents as possible to maximize the chance one blows up.
Jennings: F*** the Knicks, them n***** is always going to be weak.
It's a matter of perspective (Evans)
My personal belief is that you can turn a player into an off-the-ball guy, but it is nearly impossible to give a player PG instincts/abilities. For the life of me, I cannot think of any truly good current NBA PG I can think of that did not have that role in college.
Evans is good at producing points and opportunities for himself with the ball in his hands, but I didn’t see the court vision and passing repertoire required to be a lead guard in the NBA for a playoff team. Could he develop those skills? Sure, and I hope he does. That said, it is far easier to learn movement and sets as an off-guard than the other way around.
Completely agreed
Team play can be learned as one matures. I think passing and court vision are congenital. One has the genes (Nash) or does not (Foye). Every single year a team thinks it will buck the order of nature and try to beat this system. The latest example is Tyreke/Kings.
Chauncey Billups?
I think he’s one of the few success stories. Granted, it took him a good 6 years in the league before he really came around, but if I’m not mistaken, he didn’t play point guard full time in college.
Billups is the closest example
He was a scoring lead guard at Colorado (1.7 A/T), but I’ve always thought that much of that was because his Buffs team did not have enough guys who could put the biscuit in the basket other than him, making him force the issue more in terms of shots and passes.
Still worked out well (first Tourney win in over three decades), and he absolutely is the best example going right now.
Which is why everyone in Washington is now carrying on the tradition....
….of making the comparison to Foye. Look at Bullets forever and you’ll find it.
Chauncey was a PG in high school, though, in the Denver area. The draft in which he got taken by Boston was covered a ton in the Denver papers, and they were all about the idea of the Nuggets getting him to play PG.
Fair Enough
My more pertinent concerns had to do with spacing. This was more an issue with Rubio/Flynn playing together also.
Comments For This Post Are Closed
Secondary Sidebar
User Tools
Related FanPosts on Canis Hoopus
Related FanShots on Canis Hoopus
FanPosts
Community blog posts and discussion.
Recommended FanPosts
Recent FanPosts
In Association With
Ball Don't Lie - NBA - Yahoo! Sport
- Mike Brown wants Jimmy Goldstein to ask a press conference question (VIDEO)
- Create-a-Caption: ‘Vengeance is mine,’ quoth Alvis
- Roy Hibbert wants to play for Team USA, seeks release from Jamaican national team
- Bucks forward Jon Brockman loves wearing adult onesies
- Andrew Bynum after 9-0 Thunder run beats Lakers: ‘We’re better than Santa Claus’
