Kahn offers Big Al for Granger?
by TonyO on Jan 10, 2010 4:05 PM CST
Email
PrintAccording to Adrian Wojnarowski of yahoosports.com
Minnesota Timberwolves general manager David Kahn recently offered forward Al Jefferson to the Indiana Pacers for forward Danny Granger, but was immediately rebuffed, league sources told Yahoo! Sports.While Pacers president Larry Bird remains determined to build around Granger, sources say Kahn has become increasingly dubious on making Jefferson a cornerstone for the Timberwolves.
Hmm Maybe Big Al and somebody to the Cavs for Hickson, Z, Boobie Gibson and Danny Green?
182 comments
|
0 recs |
Do you like this story?
Comments
Just read this..
I like that deal a lot and I can understand Indiana saying no.. As for your Cleveland proposal, that’s horrible. You gotta either get a star or a top 5 pick in return for someone as skilled as Jefferson..
As much as I like Danny, I would prefer having a very nice big man combo of Kevin Love and Al Jefferson.
I mean, wouldn’t we have to start Ryan Hollins (injured) at center after this trade. Either that or have a small line up with Love at C and Gomes at PF?
oops...
Just posted this on the other thread.
I like this trade, Granger and Love would be a great fit. If Al goes we must get a proven player in return.
That would be an awesome lineup
PG – Flynn/Sessions
SG – Brewer/Ellington
SF – Granger/Wilkins/Pavlovic
PF – Gomes/Jawai
C – Love/Hollins
Clearly this trade would be made with the idea of Pekovic coming over this summer. SO there is no point in looking at current rotations. Our team will look very different next year.
The years draft has lots of big men like last years had PG. You trade Al with the idea of gettting a big man in the draft.
The most disappointing part was hearing Jefferson and Love were not getting along. I thought they were buddies.
by Kevin Love Jefferson on Jan 10, 2010 8:32 PM CST up reply actions
My understanding is that the issue is not Love and Jefferson, but Jefferson and his role on the team.
This is interesting combined with the comments Rambis
made after the Bulls game about needing to change the starting lineup and somebody needing to make a sacrifice to help the bench. I can’t think of anyone he would be talking about except moving either Love or AL to the bench. I was also thinking the he was using the need to improve the bench as a way to soften the blow to whoever is losing his starting role.
If this rumor is true, gotta think Rambis wants to pull AL from the starting lineup.
I think Rambis is preparing to move Flynn to the 2nd unit
The Wolves need scoring off the bench, and maybe Flynn will have more success driving the lane against the other team’s backup center.
I wouldn’t mind trading Big Al for Andrew Bynum. Really get some legitimate size on the middle and having experience with the triangle would be awesome. Plus, Bynum is suppose to be missing Rambis big time, so there is obviously a big connection there.
Think he misses Rambis
more than he would miss winning… and weather?
Bynum
Rumor is that Lakers are going to offer Bynum for Bosh. Obviously, they’re confident they can re-sign Bosh. I wonder if they’d give us Bynum for Big Al? Less money than Bosh is going to cost.
by TWolvesFanInLA on Jan 10, 2010 5:26 PM CST up reply actions
I see no reason
For the Lakers doing this. I’d like it for us even with the injury risk, but there’s no good reason and no good fit for the Lakers in this deal. Bynum’s a far superior defender, is taller, has lots of post moves, and doesn’t need the ball like Al does. He’s a much better triangle fit than Al as well.
absolutely
No way in hell the Lakers give us Bynum for Al. Al is nowhere close to the player that Bosh is, and not a good fit for that team.
what about a 3 team trade
with LA getting Bosh, TOR getting Al and MIN getting Bynum?
by TheEvilProfessor on Jan 10, 2010 10:25 PM CST up reply actions
Does Toronto do that?
Why would they take Al over Bynum?
If a team takes Al, they need to put him with a true C who can operate away from the basket and play good D.
Because it's better than nothing
and we could always send LA a second rounder to convince them to make us a part of it. Not advocating anything by any means, just trying to give one answer to the question. Toronto is kind of in the passenger seat here right now, as much as it might seem otherwise. They simply can’t let Bosh go for nothing at this point. They still have options (sign and trade, make a run and convince him to resign), but they are becoming limited.
Toronto would have to decide between Bynum and Big Al
I would think that Al fits next to Bargnani better than Bynum so I think that as long as the necessary filler was included this could be a reasonable deal.
I really like this deal actually
Solves one big need for us and allows us to focus on wing. Bring Pek over as a scorer off the bench for the second unit, etc. I think it makes us a much more complete team. Gives TOR a workable frontcourt and Bosh gets his chance at a ring with a huge contract.
Bynum gets to be reunited with Rambis and taught defense by Lambier (sp?), gets to play next to Love who will let Bynum have the low block and will play stretch. Between the two they will gather most rebounds. Bynum can block shots and they can both pass and make cuts in the triangle.
The one concern is injury with Bynum. I would love for him to go the ATTACK training complex with Grover and have him look at his muscle balance to see if that may be what is causing some of his injuries.
The two biggest reasons for chronic injuries are poor symmetry in muscle composition (not working out the muscles to keep them balanced) and incorrect shoes that prevent you from playing on solid ground, which can lead to ankle and knee injuries.
by TheEvilProfessor on Jan 11, 2010 11:50 AM CST up reply actions
I agree
another thing that might be good for Bynum coming here would be PT. He would definitely get a lot of PT here. He is young and he needs it. Obviously he is getting paid tons in LA for not doing much, so that’s not a bad scenario for him, but ultimately more PT will help his career. He is young so I can see him valuing his future career and money prospects more than yet another ring (at this point). Now he has to make some allstar games and get some awards. He can be our second best guy here night in and night out, what’s not to like? Oh yeah, what’s not to like besides we are a crappy team with crappy weather?
That's why I wouldn't live here during the offseason
I think we as full time workings with one residence tend to overlook that. The anonymity that comes from living elsewhere from where you have your high profile job is also pretty sweet. Some players hate getting mobbed everywhere they go because local fans will know exactly who you are.
by TheEvilProfessor on Jan 11, 2010 11:58 AM CST up reply actions
Granger
Another McHale draft error. McCants instead of Granger…I remember hoping we’d take Granger at the time of the draft.
Yeah
That was around when I really started focusing on the draft and the T-Wolves in general. I remember really wanting an athletic wing, and Granger was my choice in the teens.
To be fair, though, I was fine with Shaddy at the time. Sounded even like a value pick at the time considering his “ceiling” that was talked about. Ugh.
Definitely should have quoted this nugget as well
Minnesota also has chemistry issues between Jefferson and forward Kevin Love(notes). "There’s some jealous stuff that’s playing out," one league source said.
ha beat ya
And yes, that was the most important piece of this article.
Don’t see why everyone is swooning over Granger….we got turned down folks. Yes, he would be a great piece, but looks like it’s not happening…unless…
unless...
We can throw in some expirings for Murphy or Jeff Foster…those appear to be the only bad contracts Indy’s sitting on. Well, Dunleavy, of course, but we aint’ taking Dunleavy.
I’d be open to sitting on Foster for 2 seasons, and Murphy is probably flippable. They both have two year deals.
I think that’s too much value for Indiana. Nonetheless, I don’t know if they are the best trading partner because they have Hibbert in the low block, and don’t have enough other talent to make this anything other than an unneccessary lateral move.
It’ll be interesting. This is the first salvo. Jefferson is officially on the table.
I am just thinking if we want to revisit Granger, I’d much prefer to give up some cap space than picks/prospects.
I disagree, on the fit somewhat. If the Pacers are committed to Hibbert, they are committed to half court. Al could maybe work in that system (Smashmouth!) as a PF.
It would be interesting
pairing Al with a post-oriented big. There wouldn’t be much space in the middle on offense, but they would be formidable on defense in the post.
Maybe a Sessions for Ford swap
Ford is another contract they’d like to get rid of and replacing him with Sessions could help add value from our end.
It's on!
The genie is out of the bottle, and how about this nugget (from the above article):
Minnesota also has chemistry issues between Jefferson and forward Kevin Love(notes). “There’s some jealous stuff that’s playing out,” one league source said.
To state the obvious: The odds of Jefferson getting moved before the deadline just moved up significantly.
Not at all surprised the Pacers turned that deal down either. Should provide a reality check for all those thinking Jefferson is, or will yield, a superstar type talent.
Have to believe it’s Big Al getting jealous for all the pub Love is getting and Al becoming less of a focal point, but who knows. Regardless of whether we or the FO thinks these two could work together moving forward, if they don’t want to work together its never going to work.
I think you're probably right on
Love seems way too smart to pull the prima donna card, but I can totally see Al bitching about his new role. The guy has been demoted, there’s no way to argue he hasn’t.
I think any jealousy issue would more likely stem...
….from media and fans riding Love’s jock, but doing nothing but criticizing Al.
come on
You really think Al is reading Canis Hoopus and stewing over the Love love? I think the guy is selfish and stats focused and he wants his 20-25 shots a game.
I think...
….players hear what the media and fans say, so matter how much they insist they don’t or don’t care.
By all accounts, Al is very happy with the new system. He even said he knows he’s getting his shots, he’s just not making them, and understands that’s on him.
Canis Hoops is a pretty accurate microcosm of loving Love/hating Al that I’ve seen basically everywhere Wolves fans post.
I think if it was obvious that Love and Al could fit together, the team wouldn’t need to come out and reassure the fans and the media their current view of whether it will work. The fact that a majority of fans feel the need to pick sides in the Love vs. Al deathmatch for franchise post player, definitely means that both these guys who only get one chance to maximize personal revenue and glory see those same problems thinking about how their career is unfolding.
You think the guy is going to go on local TV and bitch about his shots? What do you expect him to say?
He is getting four less shots a game this year and Love is sucking up all the boards (the two are literally fighting each other for rebounds).
I think individual stats take a backseat to “media stardom”. If the media and fans still gushed over Al like they did two years ago, I don’t think there’d be any problem, regardless of how the two lined up in the box score.
But, Al is an uncharismatic, PF/C tweener, who plays no defense and doesn’t make his teammates better. The 20-10 was really all there was to gush about.
Like Ebomb said...
….it’s probably a case of Al getting built up too much. Whether or not he deserved it, Al was hailed as one of the best young players in the league, so he got used to being thought of that highly.
Al is a only a tweener on our team. On most teams (certainly most playoff teams), Al is playing PF. And let’s not devalue him too much. He’s one of the 2-3 best low post scorers in the game and in the playoffs when the games slow down and you need a basket in the half court set, he can get it.
by TWolvesFanInLA on Jan 10, 2010 6:30 PM CST up reply actions
Sure, if said team has a defensive monster at center to provide a ton of help and Al is the third best player on the roster, then, yeah, he’s very valuable.
sounds like the Bulls
Noah, athletic center for def help, Rose is best player on team.
by TWolvesFanInLA on Jan 10, 2010 6:41 PM CST up reply actions
Agree, but from our perspective though, any Bulls trade begins with Noah. This isn’t going to be an easy deal,. The pool of teams that would be interested in Jefferson is a lot smaller than many seem to think.
Not "is" their best player
Will be the best player, but Rose is so far behind on D and shooting that he can’t claim that yet. His prospects are sky-high, but he’s not there yet.
I'm with you
give him 2 years and he will be an allstar. At least that’s my guess. Borderline superstar but never quite to that level. Mostly just borderline because he is in Chicago and he was the first pick.
Not disagreeing with what you say
but I’ll add that I think the biggest issue is that a year ago today AL was an All-Star candidate and McHale’s guy. He suffers a major injury which is a setback in itself, but then McHale loses power as well. Then the guy who replaces McHale comes in and one of the first things he says is AL is a #2 kind of player. Quite a slap in the face to a guy who was almost an All-Star and was expected to become one within a couple years.
Then he loses major wait to try to fit in, but still doesn’t fit. There are not really any bad guys here, but AL needs to be in a system where he gets the ball almost every time the team is setting up the offense. Not gonna happen here.
It’s simple Love is a better Rebounder, a Better Passer, and an equal Defender, and because of that a much better fit for the teams focus so far this season, learning the triangle. Al deserves to be criticized because for all the pub Al gets for being a great 25 and under young player, Love is already better. Why wouldn’t the media tell it like it is?
Not saying any of that's wrong
Just that that’s a lot more likely to be the source of any jealousy issues than the new system, new coach, new teammates, etc.
For as much as the criticism this year might have been unfair to Al especially coming off of injury, the unwarranted heaping of praise that came his way without ever showing he can be a winner was just as undeserved. McHale built him up too high with praise and ultimately McHale’s final stamp on this team, the Love acquisition, brings him down due to comparisons and redundancy. Just one more lasting gift of the McHale regime I suppose.
Totally. In a perfect world Jefferson would be making 25-50% less and be an off the bench scoring monster in a change of pace second unit. The guy would kill in that role. Maybe next team?
I think calling Al a bench player...
…is a perfect example of how Wolves fans undervalue him. Put him at power forward next to a great defensive center, and Al looks like one of the best big men in the entire league.
Ex Zach Randolph
Yup
At least Kahn doesn’t seem to be undervaluing his trade value with the attempt to get Granger.
by TWolvesFanInLA on Jan 10, 2010 6:58 PM CST up reply actions
I’d say top 10 would be a stretch, but sure, if you had a great defensive center (as if they grow on trees), you could get away with Al at the 4 defensively.
But, I still say his IDEAL role is a big minute off the bench sub at the 4-5…the best way to maximize his value.
Interesting stat I saw yesterday
Since arriving in Minnesota, Al Jefferson has had 71 20/10 games.
Only two players to have more in the same period are Dwight Howard and TIm Duncan.
But we come back to the D…..
"I tell one of my media colleagues to watch Hollins, who regards cutters entering his vicinity with the sort of startled amazement newborn infants have when their own appendages enter their vision for the first times."
-Britt Robson
I'd go back to the central quesion of contracts:
How can Love get less than Jefferson when he’s better?
Forever splitting the Cheechakos from the Sourdoughs
www.canishoopus.com
Different economies
No one is getting as much money now as they were a few years ago. Al’s contract went from being considered a steal to fair money.
Al and Love are both probably $12-13 million players in the current NBA economy. We’re assuming Love continues to improve, while Jefferson regresses? If Jefferson can merely get back to last year’s production, then he’s a 23 PER player too, you know. With how typical NBA followers overvalue scoring, I don’t see Love’s perceived value will be markedly higher than Jefferson’s. If that’s the case, we give him comparable money to what we gave Jefferson, and everyone goes home happy.
Obviously, sinking $25 million/year into this combo isn’t ideal, but there are several factors to consider:
-It won’t be an issue for two more years, which is plenty of time to find a trade that doesn’t suck. Granger/Jefferson would have been it, except Indy, like us, needs a SF more than another big man.
-Even if we do decide to pay and keep both, we hope to be close to contending by then, at which point using Love’s Bird Rights to go over the cap won’t be a major problem. With contenders’ payrolls at $75 million and higher, $32 million on Love/Jefferson/true C isn’t an imbalanced allocation of resources, and following the LAL model of PF (Odom/Love), PF/C who goes back and forth (Gasol/Jefferson), and true C (Bynum/missing piece) could absolutely work at the championship level. I don’t see why this isn’t a legitimate plan.
Either way, I see no way to panic now. All these bad trade proposals make me sick. If we can get a Granger for Jefferson, we will. Failing that, there’s no reason to force a trade in which we get ripped off.
I'm fairly certain...
…the days of agents being unarmed with no Synergy Sports data is long passed. Jefferson doesn’t have to regress or improve. He’s locked in for life and even if he takes a cut on his next deal he’s likely not dipping below $10. Remember, these guys have the same agent and you can be certain that he’s not pitching Love with just basic points and rebounds.
We’re also assuming that Jefferson didn’t initiate some of this and that his agent (who also represents Pekovic) didn’t come to tell Kahn that someone has to go because there isn’t enough minutes for everyone and all three can’t achieve their full earnings potential on the same team. That’s another angle that i think is overlooked.
Forever splitting the Cheechakos from the Sourdoughs
www.canishoopus.com
The agent angle is definitely getting overlooked
People tend to assume writers get their info from front office guys, but as you know a lot of it comes from agents. I wouldn’t be surprised if the agent is actually the source on this trade rumor.
The agent thing is a worthy angle.
But I just don’t know how much Love would really command on the open market. Sure, we and his agent know how good he is, but people around the league view him as little more than a David Lee clone. David Lee, you’ll recall, couldn’t find anyone to give him a long term deal and eventually settled for a one year deal worth $8 million.
By Love’s fourth season, I expect it to be fully apparent that he is superior to Lee. However, by how much? And how much will another team be willing to offer him? Because that’s what it comes down to. Even if it’s clear to us, to Love, and to his agent that he’s better than his teammate making $15 million, who’s going to outbid us if we offer 11 or 12? I don’t know that a rival GM will get his team $14 million under the cap just to spend it on Kevin Love. We stat nerds know he’s worth it, but the majority of fans would be furious at that GM.
In my opinion, the only people who really need to be worried about this are Kevin Love and his agent.
I think it's also...
…an issue of critical mass. Jeff Schwartz knows that the collective earnings potential of his 3 power forwards cannot be maximized on a single roster. Regardless of how much Love can get on the open market, Love + Jefferson + Pekovic on one team < Love + Pekovic on the Wolves and Jefferson on another team. By getting Jefferson off of the roster, additional money is opened up for a bump to Love and a decent 1st contract to Pekovic, while Jefferson stays the same. 1 agent with 3 clients at 1 position on 1 team is not a good formula for long range cohesiveness.
Forever splitting the Cheechakos from the Sourdoughs
www.canishoopus.com
It'd be like
if Dairy Queen bought Baskin Robins and Cold Stone, yet had them all in the same shopping mall.
I hate my crappy analogies and their obvious flaws…
While I recognize that aspect,
how much power does Schwartz have in the situation? I think the scenario I laid out above is fairly plausible: that we might offer Love less than Jefferson or less than he’s worth, but not any less than other franchises are offering. If that’s happening, then it sucks for Love and the agent, but there’s nothing they can really do short of taking a pay cut to play elsewhere, which defeats the purpose of what they want anyway.
We shouldn’t trade Jefferson just to be nice to them (not that that’s what you were saying).
I'll tell you what kind of guy I think jefferson is: I think he'd rewrite his contract and take say $12 millon so we could give Love the same.
But that assumes, of course, that Jefferson hasn’t been traded away before that…..
Jefferson is the type of character guy every team wants and very few here see it
by Kevin Love Jefferson on Jan 13, 2010 4:01 AM CST up reply actions
Thanks for posting Tony
I may have clipped too muh, but I just wanted to make sure we weren’t re-posting the whole story.
www.canishoopus.com
It is just a matter of time now.
Shame, because you’d really want to hang onto Al past the deadline.
"I tell one of my media colleagues to watch Hollins, who regards cutters entering his vicinity with the sort of startled amazement newborn infants have when their own appendages enter their vision for the first times."
-Britt Robson
After a quick look through NBA teams, not a lot of great, realistic options out there for straight-up trades for Al.
SG/SF: Kevin Martin, Gerald Wallace, Deng + ???.
C: Brook Lopez (I don’t think Nets would do this), Bogut.
Milwaukee won't trade Bogut
He anchors their defense. No way Skiles’ system work with Al as the center.
I think Al would play PF for Mil. Obviously, this leaves a hole at C for them, but that team isn’t going anywhere anyway and I think Al is a better player than Bogut.
by TWolvesFanInLA on Jan 10, 2010 6:24 PM CST up reply actions
no there isn't
And as good as Al is at what he does, the market is limited for a low post scoring specialist making $10-12M. The league has been and continue to move towards an uptempo game.
Well, we're starting to get an idea about the true value
of a volume scoring ‘tweener that can’t defend. Don’t count on getting a star back for Al.
The lack of defense....
…is probably the biggest issue. Plenty of teams still run traditional halfcourt sets with a scoring post player very successfully.
spot on.
Do Al’s def #s improve when he’s at PF?
by TWolvesFanInLA on Jan 10, 2010 6:37 PM CST up reply actions
By production, only marginally
Although he holds opponents at PF to a much lower efficiency level than he does against centers, so opposing power forwards have to work a lot harder against Al to get the same production opposing centers get against Al.
Don't know how much better his "D" would be at PF...
After watching him get abused on that Brad Miller drive last night.
With this story coming out, I don’t see how much longer he can stay with the team.
its a pipedream
Any 4 that can put the ball on the floor or shoot from range would eat him alive. His D would be ten times worse. My guess is that if the stats don’t bear this out, it is only because coaches have not matched him up against athletic and/or jump shooting power forwards.
The Roof, the roof, the roof is on fire!!!!!
Let the rumors begin!!!!!! Peace out big Al. You should of been passing out of those double and triple teams long ago!
www.twitter.com/iPhoneman76 Let's talk Wolves!
Would you trade Al for Nets #1 in 2010 and Bobby Simmons expiring contract? Would Nets do that? Lopez/Jefferson frontcourt would be solid.
I keep going back to them as a target as well, due to Lopez. But they just don’t have any current assets. I’d do the guaranteed top 4 pick for sure, but it would be a tough, tough sell to the fans.
A tough sell to Wolves fans? Really?
I’d think you’d just have to say “We traded our second-best power forward and we now have two top-6 picks for the second year in a row, with one likely being top 4. We also now have around a 40% chance at landing John Wall, maybe the best talent to enter the league in seven years.”
But to Nets fans...
“We’re 3-33, and we just acquired a post scorer who is very clearly now a 2nd banana at best, and to do that, we gave up the two things giving you all any semblance of hope: A shot at John Wall in the draft, and a shot at a top-tier free agent. Thank you for your support.”
However, do you think Nets are landing a free agent better than Big Al? I don’t.
by TWolvesFanInLA on Jan 10, 2010 7:26 PM CST up reply actions
Also,
We’re seriously under the cap next summer with that trade.
by TWolvesFanInLA on Jan 10, 2010 7:25 PM CST up reply actions
Hey, I'm with you...
I just think there is a decent contingent of the (few remaining) fans that are still clinging to the “Al Jefferson-superstar” BS that was getting thrown at them from every direction the past two seasons. And those people are going to say “you just traded an all star talent for a lottery ticket, and why am I still watching this team?”
You can’t see that coming?
This team draws the worst road attendance in the NBA and is the bottom 3 of per game revenue at home. The franchise has bottomed out. No amount roster tinkering is going to change things one way or the other until the team starts winning.
Exactly.
I think we’re at the point now where Kahn can really toss out “fan reception” as a criteria for any of his moves.
I'd wanna wait til closer to the trade deadline
Just to make sure the Nets don’t get hot and move that pick into the 6 or 7 range.
Absolutely no way they trade Lopez for Al
He’s already a better player; plus he’s younger, taller, and cheaper.
The Nets wouldn't do it.
We could end up with two of the top 3 picks in the draft.
They have Al and Lopez. We introduce John Wall and Evan Turner.
"I tell one of my media colleagues to watch Hollins, who regards cutters entering his vicinity with the sort of startled amazement newborn infants have when their own appendages enter their vision for the first times."
-Britt Robson
Interesting
Sadly I agree with you, but is Al Jefferson really not worth a top 3 pick?
Probably right
At the very least, Nets would land Favors or Davis….combined with salary cap relief would probably be more valuable than Big Al.
by TWolvesFanInLA on Jan 10, 2010 8:51 PM CST up reply actions
Interesting thought
Plus the Nets would still have the cap room to bring in the big time free agent they will be pursuing this summer.
Would seem like a logical candidate to take Al. I also think that if you want to maximize value for Al you will have throw in other things we should be willing to give: take a contract someone is trying to dump, add-in the Utah pick, and Gomes, Brewer, Flynn, or Sessions.
We need someone who can defend the rim, a shooter, and a point guard who can play sixth man once Rubio arrives. Probably cannot get a superstar, but Biedrins, Curry and Maggette would be possible for Al, Utah pick, and an expiring? If you could get that deal done without taking on Maggette that would be awesome but to get Curry and Biedrins with Love and Gomes now, and with Rubio in two years, and add-in Evan Turner and that is a high-IQ rotation with Rubio, Turner, Gomes, Love, Biedrins, with Curry, Hollins, Ellington, Pekovic, the Charlotte Pick, and possibly Brewer coming off the bench. Even taking Maggette I don’t think hurts us, unless you actually think someone better is signing here.
If the Wolves can get a point guard or another wing, they should take a stab at sending an expiring, Flynn / Sessions or Brewer to Houston for McGrady to see if he can play SF for us under a more reasonable contract next year. Or using Flynn and an expiring as an inducement to try to pull Galinari (and Eddy Curry unfortunately) from New York.
We are most likely to get a SG in the draft so Brewer is probably going to be traded as well.
Smoke doesn't necessarily lead to fire
Kahn’s not giving Al away, and it’s not like these issues are affecting his play. He’s been at his best the last few weeks.
by pagingstanleyroberts on Jan 10, 2010 7:30 PM CST reply actions
Sorry
My hyperbole reserve is running low.
by pagingstanleyroberts on Jan 10, 2010 7:33 PM CST up reply actions
I have a hard time eating that crap from the media
I’m sure there is some jealousy there, but I don’t think it’s beyond a healthy level… yet. It could certainly get there, but I have no worries. They both seem like good guys who are smart enough to relish a good player by their side on such a crappy team. And since when do we all just believe whatever the media throws at us anyways? If we did that, we would all still be pissed about drafting 4 pgs last draft.
I was really hoping that we could finish the season...
before we made any decision on the K-Love/Big Al question – seeing what draft spot we landed, where the salary cap was going, etc. Now, who knows? I don’t like that this hurts our leverage with other teams – are GMs going to try and squeeze us because they know somebody has to go? Do rumors of “attitude issues” lower trade value?
This just seems par for the course for the Pups, don’t it?
Further...
This trade doesn’t necessarily represent what Al’s value is. Bird’s moves have been questionable at best recently, so it’s not clear that he thinks Granger’s better than Al, just that Al isn’t worth trading for his best player in the midst of a season and rebuilding process. They have Troy Murphy’s at PF with overrated reach pick Tyler Hansbrough backing him up, so the deal would create a roster imbalance.
by pagingstanleyroberts on Jan 10, 2010 7:36 PM CST reply actions
Think there was any discussion with:
Warriors, Wizards, Philadelphia, Raptors, or Lakers (these in particular, but everyone)? Or do you think the Pacers were the first target? If Kahn really has been calling around, then that would explain why league sources know all of this.
Interesting
I doubt we’ll trade Jefferson before the season ends. Offering him for Danny Granger is hardly “shopping” him. Granger is a star, and most people consider him to be better than even a healthy Jefferson.
It’ll just be hard to get equal value when Jeff still isn’t back to his old self. The 23-11 guy would command a pretty high trade value.
http://sports.espn.go.com/espn/page2/story?page=simmons/090212
Simmons isn’t the final authority on NBA subjects, but here’s his take on Al’s trade value, right after the ACL tear. With no injury, he would have him 9th highest trade value in the NBA. Even if that might be too high, it’s good to look back at what a non-Wolf fan thought of him when he was tearing it up in January ’08.
Kahn seems pretty sharp — I doubt he’ll let Al get away without a bigtime player coming back. There just isn’t any reason to hurry this move when we’re not hurrying anything else. A healthy Jefferson has a lot higher trade value than the recovering version.
Simmons
Keep in mind he’s a huge Celtics fan and loved Big Al in Boston.
by TWolvesFanInLA on Jan 10, 2010 8:53 PM CST up reply actions
" A healthy Jefferson has a lot higher trade value than the recovering version"
See, that may be correct, but I don’t think a healthy Jefferson making another 40 some million over the next three years has nearly as much value as we might perceive. And I don’t think the (lack of) current value has as much to do with his recovery as we might perceive, either.
If he returns to his old level of play...
then he’s got very high trade value, by most people’s estimation, and his contract is a good bargain.
Whether he can do like most young guys who tear their ACL, and return to his old form, remains to be seen. I think a full off-season of rehab should do the trick. Might not even hurt to shelf him with a KG-like injury during tanking season to boost our draft stock and fast forward the all-on rehab process.
WAS a good bargain
back in like, 2007. In the coming years, it won’t be seen as such, especially after the work stoppage/strike/lockout/sit-in. I’m guessing that the new ratio for contracts will be about two-thirds what it currently is.
He’s completely unmarketable to fans for that kind of money, he’s about as good as he’s going to get, and he’s not the type of star who improves those around him. It’s unfair, but his winning percentage as the cornerstone player is abysmal.
I’m not sure on the CBA stuff — seems like speculation. I’m just comparing Jefferson’s contract to the other contracts in the league right now. When he’s healthy and playing like he was in early ‘09 — not ’07 — it’s widely regarded as a good bargain.
When McHale was coaching and we had some veterans on the perimeter, the Wolves were starting to win. Jefferson’s injury and absence led to the worst stretch of Wolves basketball in franchise history. Not sure how that gets lost on the fans who follow the team as closely as you and many other posters here do. Was it not obvious how big his impact was after his injury last year? We hardly won any games during tanking season, when the quality of competition drops to about 50% of where it’s at in January, when we were winning.
January
I’m of the opinion that last January was a mirage. Although losing AL really hurt the team last year I don’t think it’s correct to conclude that the team’s January record is indicative of how they would have performed with Big Al healthy.
Foye and Miller were also injured post Big Al injury, but my main point is that January was a fluke. Apparently Kahn agreed.
but, we’ll never know for sure and you certainly make a valid argument.
by littleboxes on Jan 10, 2010 10:29 PM CST up reply actions
Don't forget....
….that there was a string of games before Al got hurt in NOLA where the Wolves reverted to their old ways.
http://www.canishoopus.com/2009/4/17/841317/looking-back-pt-ii-the-january
In January they won against the 10 win GSW without Maggette and Ellis. They beat the 14-20 Bulls, 11 win Griz, 5 win Thunder (Krstic’s 1st game and pre-Thabo), 9 win Clips with no Camby, Davis, or Kaman, NOLA without West or Chandler, the 18 win Bucks w a hurt Sessions and Bogut, a 22 win Bucks team w/o Redd and Bogut, an 18 win Bulls squad, and the 22-15 Suns straight up.
In the 20 game stretch between games 20-40, which goes from pretty much the end of Witt (19) and almost to the end of the Jan streak (1-20-09), the Wolves showed fair improvement in OE, eFG, defG, FT Diff, pts for, and pt diff. They also played at a higher pace in January than they did in the preceding month. Despite these gains, only OReb% was in the top 1/3 of league rankings. Almost all of their other indicators landed them in the bottom 1/3 of the league; hardly above last season’s rankings and even behind them in a few (eFG being one big one). It was hardly the Big Bang of a reborn franchise. It was nice to watch and really, really fun to see, but this team has exactly 1 month with more than 3 wins this season.
I think your argument also [understates] the dip that the team took against serious competition beginning with Detroit on the 28th. In the 6 games before Jefferson got hurt, the Wolves went 1-5 with the lone win against a 19 win Pacer club. They were taken apart by LA, Boston, Atlanta, and Houston during this stretch. Granted, 3 of those teams are upper-level squads but it was their first real competition in a month and they reverted to what their averages would suggest…they just weren’t doing it against dinged up bottom dwellers.
Throwing out January, McHale is 6-35. Throwing out the 3-18 record since Big Al was hurt along with January and he’s 3-16. The team played March like they did December, going back to roughly 94 ppg, 80 fga/game, etc. The Wolves do have bad luck (injuries) but it is almost always accompanied by outright boobery, mismanagement, and the overvaluing of assets.
Forever splitting the Cheechakos from the Sourdoughs
www.canishoopus.com
Those games...
were against Top-8 teams. It’s hard to argue that we weren’t playing our best ball since the KG trade and it fell apart instantly when Jefferson went down.
It fell apart
a few games before he went down.
Randy Foye...
…shot the hell out of the ball against some undermanned squads. With good shooting and wing play they were on track to be in the 7-10 seed range with sustained performance. They improved but it was still nearly bottom-dwelling type of stuff.
Forever splitting the Cheechakos from the Sourdoughs
www.canishoopus.com
Starting Dec 28th, the wolves went 13 wins and 10 losses, basically beating non-playoff teams. After Jefferson was hurt 7 wins and 23 losses.
Those last 30 games included 15 against the non-playoff types that the wolves went beat when they went 13 and 10.
I’m guessing the wolves roster from last year, was a .500 team, after they got their act together at the end of Dec. I think if that team was kept together (and I’m not arguing that they should have been kept together) they would have been playing .500 ball this season.
The key to that team was a healthy jefferson.
I’m hoping that Kahn understands that…
by Kevin Love Jefferson on Jan 11, 2010 9:33 AM CST up reply actions
I agree that his value is on the low end right now
One thing to consider though…Right now teams may shy away from Al because they have visions of landing LeBron, Wade, or Bosh this summer. However, once the draft rolls around, several teams are going to realize they are being left behind. These teams may gladly take on the contract rather than be $15 million below the cap and not a playoff contender.
Good point
Teams freak out all the time. Let’s hope we’re there to take advantage after we already took advantage of the salary-cap-freakouts at the previous trade deadline (right now).
didn't something list get posted the day before yesterday, about rumours in boise? It was shot down by people who had talked to the wolves.
Also, I haven’t heard Boo, from jefferson or love, about a problem between them. Until I get more than speculation on why, Kahn might have offered Jefferson for Granger, I’ll assume someone is pulling the whole Jealousy thing out of their *ss.
by Kevin Love Jefferson on Jan 10, 2010 8:52 PM CST reply actions
That's an important aspect to consider.
The dubiousness of the jealousy claim hurts the credibility of the rest of the report. Because by all accounts, Al and Kevin are tight.
Agreed..
….it doesn’t jive with everything I’ve heard. I think it’s an agent thing.
Forever splitting the Cheechakos from the Sourdoughs
www.canishoopus.com
Also keep in mind that Kahn said from the day he arrived that Al wasn't going to be the superstar. Not a Boo from Al.
Kahn said Al was #2 and Love was #4. If it became Love #1 and Al #2 I don’t think Al would complain.
if I saw any jealousy on the court during games, it appeared be Flynn wanting to take more shots and Rambis wanting to feed the post and play inside out.
by Kevin Love Jefferson on Jan 10, 2010 8:55 PM CST reply actions
Rambis
Let’s keep in mind, that Rambis was certainly consulted before Kahn made this call to Indy. So presumably he’s fine with Kahn exploring trade options for Al.
As I've
mentioned previously, I wanted to put up a post on all the reasons Al should be traded sooner rather than later. My guess/hope was this summer, but it looks like they need some spark now to get the season ticket holders and advertisers to re-up for next year (my bet is that as bad as the numbers were last year at this time, they’re even worse now).
I'm going to go ahead and call BS on this story...
Or at least something is missing. Danny Granger is a Base Year Compensation player, so making this deal work under the salary cap is almost impossible. Here’s a link to the ESPN Trade Machine…
http://games.espn.go.com/nba/tradeMachine
I challenge anyone to come up with a trade involving Granger and Big Al that works.
The Best I could do
is Al Jefferson, Gomes, and Pavlovic for Granger, TJ Ford, and Diener…
But that still means that Minnesota takes on an additional 3 million in salary and TJ Ford who has a player option for next year at 8 million. I find that hard to believe.
Or How About
Not that either team would do these but:
Al Jefferson and Gomes for Granger, Jeff Foster, and Earl Watson or
Jefferson and Pavlovic or Pecherov for Granger and Foster?
Oh, Blakeley . . .
. . . I’ve been so impressed by your new attitude, and now you have to go and use the “B” and the “S” letters. Isn’t “baloney” a strong enough word to express how dubious you are?
PoorDick
Your mind is still tainted by past experiences on mean spirited message boards. In the new world of positive commenting, BS stands for Baby Suri.
Much like Tom and Kate’s marriage, citing Baby Suri implies that you believe something to be completely untrue…but in a positive manner! (Unless of course you are Baby Suri, Tom Cruise, Katie Holmes, or part of their extended family)
Indeed
no need to bring in the supreme arbiter either.
We all know that art is not the truth, art is a lie that makes us realize the truth.--Picasso
how about
Jefferson, Sessions, Cardinal for Granger, Ford, Foster.
Indy’s get a PG upgrade out of the deal. I still think MN has to throw in picks to get Granger in this one. I can’t see Indiana being that interested in Jefferson.
by littleboxes on Jan 10, 2010 10:20 PM CST up reply actions
Financial
this saves Indiana about 8 million next year. Big Al makes a little more than Granger, but sessions is cheap, and Cardinal comes off the books, but Foster and Ford must be paid next year.
Although I’ve heard the Pacers are in serious financial trouble, I don’t know how they would sell the Granger trade to their fans. It would help them sell it wolves gave them the Utah pick or the Charlotte pick. Perhaps they could give the Wolves their second round pick this year and possibly next year.
by littleboxes on Jan 10, 2010 10:25 PM CST up reply actions
I figured right away this was one of those deals that has no chance of being made, but the offer still gets made and usually it doesn’t get reported in the media. I just don’t think Indiana would have much motivation to make this deal. I think they probably look at Granger as elite talent to build a team around, regardless of whether or not that’s the case. Interesting to know for sure that Kahn is willing to trade Jefferson, not that their was much doubt.
As far as the jealousy stuff goes, that stuff probably happens on some level on every team in the NBA.
Much ado about nothing
I don’t see how this is even a news story:
1) Is the trade itself surprising? Not really. In a vacuum, Big Al for Granger is about fair value.
2) Is it surprising that Minnesota offered it? No. The value is fair, but Granger is a better fit, solving the two-PF thing.
3) Is it surprising that Indiana rejected it? Nope. Granger is the face of their franchise, and they have a lot of money locked up in big men already. There isn’t enough incentive for them to make such a drastic change.
To me, there isn’t much to see here. Kahn wouldn’t be doing his job if he weren’t putting these offers out there on the off chance that the other team bites. I think it’s quite a leap that people are going from “Kahn made a fair offer to trade Al” to “Kahn is determined to trade Al for fair value or not.” I’m glad Kahn isn’t as impatient or clueless of trade value as most of the posters here.
Kahn said in a podcast interview with ESPN 2 days ago there will be no major moves till next summer.
so either kahn was “stretching the truth” in the interview – possible GM’s have been known to do that – though Kahn has always appeared to me to be a “straight shooter” or the the trade proposal is “MADE UP”.
NOT A REAL TRADE PROPOSAL FROM WOLVES.
Why would Indiana be interested? They have lots of big men themselves. If Kahn made this offer he’d know the answer before he dialed the phone number.
The ONLY WAY the Pacers are interested is if we overpay in a big way, since PF isn’t a need for them. Offer Al and our first round lottery pick for example. And that wouldn’t be a good trade for us.
I don’t believe this is a real trade offer.
It is more garbage from writers trying to “stir the pot”.
by Kevin Love Jefferson on Jan 11, 2010 8:22 AM CST reply actions
just like Kahn's
I haven’t fielded any trade offers…then a trade 3 days later? The wording is very important with Kahn. You can’t generalize. If he threw out a “expect” or “don’t plan” then do not expect no movement until the summer. His door is always open for business as it always should be considering our record and talent level.
Only championship teams should really think about not making moves to affect chemistry. IMO
by TheEvilProfessor on Jan 11, 2010 8:35 AM CST up reply actions
Yes.
Yes, yes, yes.
WTF does this team have to lose? And too true about Kahn’s caginess. He’ll probably make all kinds of dopey basketball decisions. But in terms of crafting language and the release of (dis)information, cripes the guy has a background in law and media. I think you watch what he does, not what he says.
If he had "Received" an offer from Bird, you'd be correct. But the story said, Kahn made the call. So either he "stretched the truth" when he said he expected no major moves till summer or he never made the call
. [If you are calling teams or a team offering your highest paid player, thats a major move by any definition.
Some GM’s lie habitually. But I personally think Kahn’s a straight shooter. So I don’t think the call ever happened.
by Kevin Love Jefferson on Jan 11, 2010 9:27 AM CST reply actions
he doesn't lie
but he does construct his comments in ways that give him lots of flexibility. He never said they were going to make any trades, but that he hadn’t made any calls. That doesn’t mean that someone didn’t call him.
The more I think about it, the more I like the three team trade involving Bosh, Al and Bynum. It just kind of fits IMO. They could also do it in the summer as a sign and trade.
by TheEvilProfessor on Jan 11, 2010 9:34 AM CST up reply actions
"But I personally think Kahn’s a straight shooter"
I think and hope you are wrong on this. Of course fans would like accurate information about what’s going on behind the scenes. But if we know it, everybody else in the league knew it weeks ago. Revealing that information will hurt the Wolves in negotiating with other paries.
Negotiating trades is not about lying. Its about accurately valuing all parts of the deal and using what leverage you have to get the best deal possible and communicating clearly how a deal can help you and the other party.
If are “lying” about, for instance, how much you value Jefferson negotiating partners can see that they are less likely to trust you to “make a fair deal”.
Something Kahn has done in many of his deals is “help both parties”. That takes a fair amount of honesty in trade discussions.
by Kevin Love Jefferson on Jan 11, 2010 9:45 AM CST up reply actions
I think you're blowing his comments way out of proportion and you're wrong about negotiating technique
I think he said he didn’t expect to make any moves, but he also said no one is untouchable in that podcast. And not expecting to make a move doesn’t preclude him from making one if the right deal came along. What he said really didn’t mean much of anything, you can’t learn much from comments like that coming from an NBA GM, so it just isn’t much of an issue. It’s actually the only thing you can say, unless you’re painted into a corner by a player who wants out. You drive down the price of your players if other GM’s think you’re married to the idea of making a trade.
And you don’t just lay all your cards on the table in regards to how much you value players when dealing with other teams. It doesn’t work that way. Of course you want them to think you value what you’re offering more than you do, that’s just a basic negotiating principle. That’s how you get the best possible deal, and every GM and agent in professional sports doesn’t. And other GM’s don’t rely on “trust” for you to “make a fair deal.” That doesn’t exist.
"every GM and agent in professional sports DOES IT"
not “doesn’t”
And I’m not saying you can’t find an example of opposite, but they’re rare and when it happens you can bet they have some sort of ulterior motive, and it’s not because they’re trying to be nice.
The best GM's who want to be around a while, try to deal fairly with their trade partners. They make deals that work for both parties.
[when i say “be around for a while” I mean don’t have a reputation as a “bad trade partner” who no one wants to do deals with.]
I think the best GM’s are also relatively honest with their fan base. Some GM’s have “no clue”. Some know what they want to do in a general sense and share that with their fans – thats the type of GM I mean is an “honest” one.
I’m not saying you tell the pubic and your opponents every aspect of your strategy.
But you can say:
I expect no major deals before next summer and mean it.
or you can say
We are not looking for any major deals but if someone makes an offer you can’t refuse , you go with it.
or you can say
We could be selectively looking for deals that enhance team value, but the type of deal we are seeking will be difficult to make. So I wouldn’t count on a deal being done. When the inevitable follow up comes asking who might be traded, brush that off…… can’t get into those details…..or something like that…..
You can be honest but not hurt your negotiating position. I most respect an honest GM. I think Kahn is one of those GM’s. But maybe I’m wrong.
by Kevin Love Jefferson on Jan 11, 2010 11:26 AM CST up reply actions
I think you’re being idealistic in terms of how trading works among GM’s. I happen to have a bit of training in negotiating and you don’t just walk into a deal holding your cards backwards. If you did, word would get around and you’d get trounced in every deal you made. Maybe that’s unfortunate, but that’s how it works, and you can be assured that everyone in the NBA understands that.
As for what he says to the fans and how it lines up with what’s really happening, I’m having a hard time getting worked up about it. He strikes me as the kind of guy who makes every effort to be an open book with the fans, but he also knows that what he says to them he’s saying to all the other teams, so it’s not realistic to think he’d answer every question like he’s writing in his diary. The guy is extremely intelligent and knows exactly what he’s doing in these interviews, and he’ll say what he can, so just get comfortable with reading between the lines.
agreed
deal making isn’t necessarily about swindling as construing what you are giving them in the best possible light and pointing out the flaws of what you are taking back. Your ability to do that and get marginal improvements elsewhere will make a solid deal a great one.
by TheEvilProfessor on Jan 11, 2010 11:55 AM CST up reply actions
Let me tell you about negotiating. It depends on the situation. If it is a "one time deal" you can "swindell" someone.
But the best way to negotiate is to have some regard for your trading partner – if you want to deal with them and with others who hear about your negotiating style, in the future.
I’ve found, from personal experience its best to try to help all parties to “have a win”.
["Negotiators have been in my family for many generations. My dad negotiated the largest deals for one of the largest fortune 500 companies. I’ve been a small business man most of my life, negotiating deals constantly. ]
The first lesson my father taught me when I was a child, if there are 5 aggies (marbles), you never take all of the aggies. The other guy also has to “win” or he just won’t play with you in the future.
I have given that same advice to my son.
by Kevin Love Jefferson on Jan 11, 2010 2:34 PM CST up reply actions
too many swindles ala Pritchard
and no one wants to deal with you period. Even if it isn’t with the same person. If you gain the rep of being someone that always wins deals that are very lopsided, people won’t even answer the phone.
As a GM it is your job to find trades that makes sense. If someone calls you and gives you a proposed trade that is a winfall for you, then great. But if you are working the phones and trying to sell trades that later become totally unfair, you will pay for it.
by TheEvilProfessor on Jan 11, 2010 2:57 PM CST up reply actions
Some NBA GM's are very straight forward in what they say and do and they are very successful.
If Kahn didn’t answer the question, or said something like “we could make a major move if the right deal came along for a key player, but I think the odds are against it” ,…. that’s what I’d expect Kahn if he was making trade calls for guys like Jefferson but “looking for the right deal”.
by Kevin Love Jefferson on Jan 11, 2010 9:40 AM CST reply actions
I think you need to separate hiding intentions and opinions
from screwing another GM. Trading players with hidden baggage (drugs, injuries, etc) and taking advantage of other GMs will get you a bad rep, but overvaluing your players to the media and fans, or saying you don’t need to make a deal, is never bad or looked down upon by other GMs. The same goes with agents IMO.
I’ll give an example. If I were an NBA GM, I would hang up the phone the second I got a call from Carlos Boozer’s agent this summer. The reason is because of the scam that was pulled when he signed with Utah and screwing Cleveland. I don’t want to deal with this player or agent.
On the flip side, as long as he is being ethical, a GM should do whatever it takes to improve his team. Long term GMs in pro sports are rare. Even a guy like Pritchard might have some jealous colleagues now who won’t deal with him, but he will still have a job in five years. The guys who refuse to deal with him will be replaced over the next five years by guys who will deal with him.
At the end of the day
Kahn is honest. But he is also a word smith who is very particular about how he constructs his comments to provide him alot of leeway to still make deals. He doesn’t make alot of concrete comments like “There will be no trades until the offseason.”
Instead he will say “I have no intention of making any trades until the offseason.” Because intentions change and he may be offered a sweet trade that makes his team better and be put into a position that he has to decide whether to be viewed as dishonest or take the good deal.
At least this is my view of Kahn. I enjoy it as it gives us plenty of information to speculate with by inferring from what types of caveats he builds into his comments, while not handicapping himself by being all Mike Tice honest.
by TheEvilProfessor on Jan 11, 2010 3:01 PM CST reply actions
If you are smart, you will understand what Kahn's "word smithing" is telling you.
From his comments in recent weeks these are his intentions:
He will not be calling and offering his core players to other teams for this season.
If another team called with a trade proposal for one of his core players, Kahn would listen and respond.
But no deals will be done for core players, unless they were great deals for the wolves.
So I personally don’t expect Al to be traded this season.
Kahn also said, he would be evaluating his core this summer and could make deals then. But I think that applies to everyone on the team. As good as Love has looked, if Miami offered Wade for Love, I think Kahn would drive Love to Miami.
Also keep in mind that Rambis said in the last week that he thought Love and Jefferson could be compatible with a good defensive big man to defend the rim.
THE GRASS IS ALWAYS GREENER!!
and gets greener all the time…lol….
by Kevin Love Jefferson on Jan 13, 2010 4:20 AM CST up reply actions
Agreed
I was just trying to point out that there is no room in my definition of bluntly honest for phrases like “word smithing.” But there is plenty of room in the definition of honest.
by TheEvilProfessor on Jan 13, 2010 10:42 AM CST up reply actions
Comments For This Post Are Closed
Secondary Sidebar
User Tools
FanPosts
Community blog posts and discussion.
Recommended FanPosts
Recent FanPosts
Next Game
In Association With
Ball Don't Lie - NBA - Yahoo! Sport
- Days of NBA Lives: Wherein Roy Hibbert tap-dances to Maine
- Grizzlies Valentine’s Day cards are the key to love
- Kevin Love would like the NBA to take the MLB’s approach on All-Star games
- Kobe Bryant fires a few hilarious salvos at Jeremy Lin
- Brandon Jennings states the obvious regarding his 2014 free agency, everyone goes nuts
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.
