Moving On Out?
by Stop-n-Pop on Jan 10, 2010 9:49 PM CST
Email
PrintWith the unsourced news whispers that an Al Jefferson trade is afoot and a Big Piranha/Big Al jealousy battle is in full effect I thought it would be a good time to make a few comments about the situation as well as give a small preview to the upcoming After 40 stats post that essentially reads as little more than Kevin Love Is Really, Really Good.
First, the heart of the Big Al/Big Piranha situation has less to do with whether or not they can coexist on the court, and more to do with whether or not Love, a superior performer, is willing to play for much less than Jefferson at essentially the same position. It also has to do with whether or not David Kahn is interested in dealing out two $10+ mil deals to what amounts to dual power forwards. Keep in mind that Jefferson, Love, and Nikola Pekovic all have the same agent. Remember that this agent was in town last week. What was said about his clients at the meeting with Kahn?
If we are going to talk about performance, it is really hard to overstate just how well Love is playing as a 21 year old big and how much of an impact he has had on the Wolves since his return. For instance, before coming back on December 4th, the Wolves had the 28th worst reb% in the league at .480%. Since his return they are 4th in the league at .526%. By essentially doubling his assist rate and shooting .438% from beyond the arc, Love has diversified his game while losing none of his rebounding edge. The Wolves' offense essentially collapses when he is on the bench, as the team scores 9.1 fewer points per 100 possessions when he is off the court compared to when he out in the thick of things. (The Wolves' defense only takes a 2.8 point hit per 100 possessions when Love is on the bench.) Again, let's imagine that Love improves his conditioning and quickness and that he continues to improve for another 2-3 seasons before entering his prime (at 24, a year younger than Big Al is right now). How on earth do you pay the guy at essentially the same position as a guy who will be due $14 million on the year Love is first eligible for an extension? If Love is averaging something in the neighborhood of 18/13/4 while maintaining his current rebound, turnover, and assist rates, you can forget about Al putting up 20/10 and being considered a superior performer (as if you can't already forget that right now).
Second, if you can turn Al Jefferson into Danny Granger, you do it in a heartbeat. I'll work on a statistical overview in the next few days (I have never really looked at Granger's game before; he's a lot better than I thought) but not only does Granger fill a positional need for the Wolves but he does so without really eating into their additional assets that could also be moved in the coming off season. If you can move Jefferson for a player that does not add to next year's salary cap and who plays on the wing with legit numbers (as Granger does), that is a no-questions-asked must-make deal for Kahn and the Wolves. It's not that Granger is better than Jefferson or that Love and Jefferson can't play together, but that Love + Granger > Love + Jefferson or Jefferson + Granger.
Finally, as I have noted several times this season, I have finally come to the conclusion that the Love/Al pairing is not going to work out for the Wolves. Love's progression has been so good, and his impact on the team so significant vis-a-vis Jefferson, that it's really hard to come up with a justification to head down the path that would keep the aforementioned two $10+ million power forward contracts on the roster . Could it work? Yes. Should it work? Not if you want a balanced and exciting team for many years to come. Someone has to go and if Jefferson can be turned into an above average wing player like Danny Granger, that is a good way for it to happen.
BTW: Is this the official beginning of the Big Al/Big Piranha Death Match? Is it bad karma to even reference the Shaddy/Foye Death Match?
UPDATE: One of the things that really doesn't jive about the Love/Jefferson rumor is the idea that there is some sort of jealous rift between Jefferson and Love. By all accounts we have heard the two are fairly tight (with Jefferson referring to Love as his "son"). My guess on the situation is that Jefferson, Love, and Pekovic are all represented by the same agent and I think it is fairly clear that all three power forwards cannot achieve their full earnings potential on the same squad. If Pekovic is coming over this off-season, and if Love is due an extension in two, maybe professional "jealously" resides solely with the agent.
205 comments
|
0 recs |
Do you like this story?
Comments
I heard somewhere.
it slipped my mind where but Chicago is interested in a deal..Possibly maybe Luol Deng and Taj Gibson for Big Al?
Think we could net Tyrus Thomas out of the deal
to make up for our lack of a true center? They didn’t pick up his option for next year, so they obviously aren’t too attached. He is the exact profile of guys we want, as long as his attitude doesn’t become an issue.
Noah over Thomas
Watching the Bulls, Thomas is the athletic long player we could use. But he gets hurt a lot and attitude is an issue. Like Noah better. Good on a running team, can block shots. A much better Hollins who plays hard. I see him fitting in with Love real well. Similar hard-nose attitude. Add Hinrich to balance the dough, and I am in.
by ChicagoViking on Jan 10, 2010 10:39 PM CST up reply actions
I would take Noah and Deng
Deng’s played out of his mind this year, and I think his career numbers are really pretty solid. Getting rebuffed on Granger was kind of a wake up call to me on what Al’s real value is. Maybe part of it is the whole coming back from injury thing, but I still figured his production and especially contract would make him pretty desirable.
Having said all that, I’d send Al and Gomes and our last first round pick to Chicago for Noah and Deng. Heck, I’d even consider sending the Charlotte pick to get it done. It would be a huge boon to our squad to pair Noah with Love and replace bag o donuts with Deng.
"Come on Eddie, let's get serious."
How much of a wake up call was it really?
It makes total sense that Indiana would reject that offer. Even if Al is worth slightly more than Granger in a vacuum, it’s pretty easy to see why factors like fit and fan perception would be more than enough to make Indiana say no.
Kahn Likes James Johnson
He said on draft night that he thought James Johnson could be top 5 talent in the draft and I think we would have kept the 18th pick if Johnson was there.
Yeah
I also heard he only wanted Johnson because he knew Sacramento was interested and he would have traded Flynn + Johnson for Tyreke.
That would have been sweet
I had heard a similar rumor involving Flynn but I thought it involved Memphis and Thabeet
It's entirely possible
but considering Kahn had just traded away Miller and Foye, I think he had his eye on some guards.
Thank God, no Thabeet
I was hoping for this guy on Draft night. But, I just don’t see it now. Not athletic enough.
by ChicagoViking on Jan 10, 2010 10:48 PM CST up reply actions
Adjusted for playing time, Thabeet's not been that bad
His rebounding’s quite respectable, too, which was one thing I’d wondered about based on college. He’s got foul trouble, is the main problem with Hasheem, and that’s not so unusual for a rookie shot-blocking big.
Memphis has a wonderfully efficient player in front of Thabeet in Marc Gasol, which is part of why he’s not getting as much court time. Gasol is freaky consistent and efficient offensively.
"It has come to the editor’s attention that the Herald-Leader neglected to cover the civil rights movement. We regret the omission."
Johnson isn’t getting much burn for Bulls…it would scare me if he’s an important piece in a potential trade with Bulls.
I wish I knew what we really had in Pekovic. Is he Brad Miller? A guy that can avg 12/8 and play nasty interior defense? If so, I’d rather see us take our chances with Pekovic/Hollins/Jawai at center and trade Al for fringe All-Star wing (Granger, K-Mart etc).
by TWolvesFanInLA on Jan 10, 2010 10:44 PM CST up reply actions
Johnson
Doesn’t play a lot. Doesn’t shoot well. Hard to tell. He just doesn’t play. The bulls probably would do James Johnson and either Deng or Hinrich to make the cash work. I would take Hinrich and deal Sessions. Hinrich would be an upgrade there. That is, if I can’t get Noah, which you probably can’t.
Still Hinrich/Johnson. Kahn would have to be way right about Johnson.
by ChicagoViking on Jan 10, 2010 10:45 PM CST up reply actions
Hinrich and Johnson for Al? No thanks. We were talking a year ago about Miller for Hinrich and most didn’t like that trade.
by TWolvesFanInLA on Jan 10, 2010 10:47 PM CST up reply actions
Deng or Noah would have to be part of the deal, but Hinrich, Deng / Noah, and Johnson for Jefferson and Sessions. I don’t think we would want Deng’s five years remaining.
Hinrich only 3 years
Another plus for Hinrich. Only 3 years. But, what is the other piece if they don’t give up Noah? Nothing else seems that great.
by ChicagoViking on Jan 10, 2010 10:51 PM CST up reply actions
Deng's not bad
Dude shoots a career .481 eFG or something like that, draws 4-5 FTAs a game, plays great defense. He strikes me as the kind of player who’s game would really flourish in the triangle. And I know everyone thinks his contract is horrible, but I guess I really don’t think that he’s getting way overpaid for what he provides. He’s had a couple ‘down’ years, but according to 82games his +/- per 48 minutes:
This year: +22.9
2008: -1.5
2007: -1.6
2006: +6.7
2005: +4.2
2004: +6.1
Those are really solid per game numbers. His defense has been great the whole time, his offense has fluctuated a little. Even saying that his offense is a liability is a pretty weak argument. Compare with Gomes’ numbers:
This year: +5.3
2008: -5.9
2007: +3.7
2006: -9.5
Gomes has been one of our better players this year, and Deng would be a more consistent upgrade over that, and one who can actually play most of minutes at SF. I guess all I’m saying is that I don’t think Deng is a pail of slop as a player, and I think his contract is relatively fair – at least as fair as what Al is getting paid to do/produce. Maybe the length is the big hiccup with Deng’s contract, but so far the guy looks like a solid player who should reasonably be expected to produce over the length of the contract.
"Come on Eddie, let's get serious."
I like Hinrich
and would do an Al trade with Noah for him. But, that’s not going to happen cause you probably don’t get Noah or Rose form the Bulls. I don’t see the other piece from the Bulls that would go with Hinrich to make it worth it.
by ChicagoViking on Jan 10, 2010 10:49 PM CST up reply actions
I think Noah...
…is a pipe dream. Of all the players the Bulls have, he and Rose seem the least likely to be available.
I'm going to give up now.
I meant Al instead of Noah, and I can’t seem to correct myself. Really wish you could delete or edit posts.
Good for Flynn
Hinrich would let you move Flynn to the second unit without hurting his ego. They could run the show until training camp opens in 2011 and then they can be in a death match for sixth man role.
If we trade all to Chicago...
…we’d have to get Ty Thomas back for the deal to make any sense. We won’t get Noah, I’m pretty sure of that. Deng is a hard sell both basketball wise and PR wise as a great acquisition. Brad Miller is all blah, and too old to make a difference for us long term.
Thomas is the only player with any upside and excitement that the Bulls will be willing to part with.
Thomas
Watching him here in Chicago, they are willing to part with Thomas. Hurt a lot and he doesn’t always play hard. When he puts it together, he is pretty good. Who else with Thomas? Maybe the Bulls don’t make sense.
by ChicagoViking on Jan 10, 2010 10:53 PM CST up reply actions
Blah Luol Deng
Overrated in a big big way.
Also, the Love/Jefferson death match has been going on for a long time. The front office just hasn’t gotten involved until now.
Would you
Share with me why you think he’s so over-rated? When I look at his numbers I see a player who has an overall consistently positive impact on his team. This year he’s been amazing, but he plays good defense, draws FTAs well, and would seem like a guy who would do well in the triangle. I would love to know what I’m missing or not taking into consideration?
"Come on Eddie, let's get serious."
Massive drop off over the last two years considering how much he’s paid. You have to be absolutely certain he’s going to keep producing at the level he’s currently at to justify the deal he’s on.
When I get sad, I stop being sad and be awesome instead. True story.
Good point
It’s a bit of a tough read – do you look at the past two years as the trend or the aberration when compared to the first 3-4 years? And what do we make of this year? The difference per game for the Bulls between when he’s on and when he’s off the court is a staggering +22 points! Half on offense, half on defense. Guy’s played 35 games at 38 minutes a night, so it’s not like this is an isolated condition. So I hear you – which is the trend and which is the aberration? I’m tempted to say that the trend lies in his earlier production, that he’s not quite as bad as he was the last two years (which really wasn’t that bad except for what he’s getting paid) nor is he as good as he’s been this year.
Seems like enough people aren’t sold on him though, and that’s worth something. I suppose the real truth is that I hope we land Evan Turner. That’s the perimeter player I really want.
"Come on Eddie, let's get serious."
by biggity2bit on Jan 11, 2010 11:27 AM CST up reply actions
He just doesn't seem to stand out in any way
I dunno….it’s the same argument I have against Josh Howard.
Statistically (and especially when you look at his advanced statistics) Deng makes a huge impact…but when you watch him play you just don’t see it, and in terms of record and “punch”, the Bulls never seem to feel it, nor do they seem to miss him when he’s gone (like Howard). He shoots, but isn’t a great shooter, rebounds but isn’t a great rebounder, passes but isn’t a great facilitator, defends but doesn’t lock anyone down….just a lot of “good but not great” in his game, and there’s nothing he can really do that can’t be made up by a different player that can do something else a lot better than he can as well.
Relative to his contract, maybe
But Deng’s defense is a big swing vote for me.
This is all moot. I very, very much doubt we’ll be seeing Luol Deng on a Wolves roster. The idea of a Noah-Deng trade is even more far-fetched.
"It has come to the editor’s attention that the Herald-Leader neglected to cover the civil rights movement. We regret the omission."
That trade
Is a ripoff for us, even if only for the fact that we’d have 2 quality trade assets afterward rather than 1.
Hyup
Unless we see Jefferson as, to use Kahn’s expression, a “transformational” player, Noah and Deng back for him would be asking a lot. The only thing that makes it even imaginable would be Deng’s nasty contract.
"It has come to the editor’s attention that the Herald-Leader neglected to cover the civil rights movement. We regret the omission."
Quality player =/= Quality asset
Deng is good, but his contract isn’t. Noah would need to be included to make up the value lost on the downgrade from Jefferson to Deng.
I’ve been against the Love-Jefferson idea since its inception in the ‘08 Draft. I would have rather started a little guy-big guy combo of Mayo and Jefferson, and drafted DeAndre Jordan as a project center for the future. But I wouldn’t trade Jefferson right now. His trade value is low, and it’s low for an obvious reason – that being the ACL tear that is seemingly forgotten by fans, even though it happened less than one year ago. The impact of Jefferson was unbelievably obvious when we went from winning more than half of our games in early ‘09 to losing almost all of them after he got hurt. There aren’t many players in the entire league whose absence takes such a toll on the win/loss column. Jefferson’s injury proved him to be one of those guys.
If Jefferson doesn’t “make his teammates better” the way that Love sometimes does, he makes the team itself better by dominating the low block. David Kahn has been hired to make Jefferson’s teammates better. I think he’ll succeed in doing that over the next year or two.
I would obviously trade Jefferson (or Love) for Danny Granger. But as someone posted in the previous thread on this topic, Granger is a base year compensation player – making him virtually untradeable, so I doubt that Kahn even made the offer.
repeating myself
I fundamentally disagree with using the wolves record in january 2009 as the counterfactual for the rest of the 2009 season would have transpired had Al Jefferson not been hurt.
We’ve been over and over this on this board, but January 2009 has it’s problems as an example of the team really coming on. It’s my opinion that the January record was a fluke.
Of course, I can’t prove that January was a fluke.
by littleboxes on Jan 10, 2010 10:33 PM CST up reply actions
It coincided with a pretty significant coaching change and style of play. Of course it was a fluke that we had the best record in the NBA for an entire month. It wasn’t a fluke that we were playing good basketball and looking like a team that was starting to figure it out.
When Big Al went down, we were impossible to watch. Unless Bassy was doing his annual 30-point game or our opponent was resting its starters for lottery tanking, we got smoked. Mike Miller driving and kicking to Bassy in the corner. That play is burned into my memory forever, I think. It was our primary offensive set. That’s what you get when 0 of your players command extra defensive attention.
The Miller Kick...
… now Washington fans are getting the pleasure of witnessing his drive ’n kicks and his nightly lines of 5/6/5. They just have to remember that Miller knows basketball…you know, basketball? Dr. James Naismith invented it?
At least Mike recently got a haircut, so my girlfriend won’t confuse him and Walter Hermann anymore. Baby steps.
Hornets did not have West or Chandler when we beat them last January. I think we played the Bulls without Deng and Gordon or at least an injured Gordon twice during the same stretch. I just remember playing a lot of injured teams then.
The Warriors were healthy
I was at that game, and they couldn’t stop Al. Also, they really needed a PG. I do remember Rob Kunz getting some burn, not sure whether that was health or not. Still, we played what appeared to be a solid game.
I’m fully on the side of Love staying and Al going, though I do believe that Al is the best low post scorer in the league. I just don’t see a lot of guys doing what Love is doing. AndyG, I know you’re a big Al > Love and Mayo > Love guy, and I don’t want a thunderdome conversation here, so Imma gonna leave that be.
Here's the breakdown of the Jan schedule from a previous post:
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
I did a post about it last summer
I’m not going to take the time to research it again, but the record of the teams that the Wolves beat in that stretch was below average. I also think they caught a few of the better teams at Target Center when the other team was playing the 2nd game in two nights.
That's why it was a fluke...
that we had the best record in the NBA for that month. But it doesn’t change the fact that we were playing good basketball — something that hadn’t been the case since 2004 or 2005, and certainly hasn’t been the case ever since.
Regardless of win/loss records, we went from playing what any Wolves fan would call pretty good basketball to playing what the same Wolves fan would call terrible basketball, when Jefferson went down.
Love’s absence in the early part of this year was also noticed. Certainly not to the extent that Jefferson’s was in early ‘09, but Love has shown himself to also be a very good player this year. Since the Wolves are still acquiring assets and talent wherever they can get it, I don’t think now is the right time to make a detail-oriented move that lowers the talent level of the team for the sake of a slightly more balanced roster. I wouldn’t trade Love or Jefferson in this type of a move. I’d only do it if a player like Granger was coming in return and made it a no-brainer.
Opinion
It’s Andy G’s informed opinion that Jefferson’s absence was noticed more than Love’s. We can’t prove it either way. It’s even difficult to quantify the effect of Love coming back this year because big Al was getting healthy at the same time.
by littleboxes on Jan 10, 2010 11:37 PM CST up reply actions
For sure
that’s exactly why I was wondering if he had some evidence behind it or if it was just that. I’d say they were pretty even, with a slight advantage to Love because of quality of teammates… slight advantage…
Reasoning...
First off, Love’s absence was felt, to be sure. We were 2-16 without him and are 6-14 with him. On top of that, the games were instantly more competitive and fun to watch after he returned.
But on the other hand, when Love returned at Game #19, we had the league’s second-worst record, which is exactly where we sit today. While there has been definite improvement, it’s easily overstated when you factor in the simple fact that we were the 29th best team without him and are the 29th best with him.
We played 32 games without Jefferson in 08-09. We went 7-25 with 2 wins against playoff teams. We beat Miami behind a rare 30-point performance from Bassy. We beat Utah behind 50 Gomes-Carney points and a 2 pt 6 reb performance from K-Love. The other wins were against lottobound teams – in some cases doing some tanking.
With Jefferson, we were 17-33. Not exactly tearing up the league, but we obviously improved significantly when Wittman was canned. No, I don’t think we would have kept up the January pace or anything close to it. But it was clear that we could beat the bad teams and some of the average ones with regularity. If memory serves me right and Witt was fired after the blowout loss to LAC, then McHale was 13-18 before Jeff’s injury.
There is also the added variable of Jefferson not being 100% this year and how that was at its worst when this season began, without Love. It’s fair to attribute some of the improvement to Al’s improvement, as the year has gone on. Love’s biggest fans would give him the credit for Al’s increased production. Some of that may be true, but given how he was barely cleared to play with contact before the season began, I think it was mostly the knee slowing him early on.
Fair enough
I tend to think otherwise, but I’m sure you know my reasoning so I see no reason to highjack the topic and go any further on this topic here. Unless you would rather, then let me know and I will type something up for you. Although I think SnP gave a nice summary of those games where we won almost half of those.
Wolves were 13 wins and 10 losses from December 28th till Al got hurt. 7 and 23 afterward.
The last 30 games, when Al was hurt had a similar mix of “quality” games. 15 of those 30 were none playoff teams, the same types that the team beat while going 13 and 10.
by Kevin Love Jefferson on Jan 11, 2010 7:47 AM CST up reply actions
Al is the guy to go
I liked Al when we were going to supposedly build an inside out team with the likes of Miller spacing the floor and Al down low. But, that didn’t work. Now with the triangle, he doesn’t fit. We need a defensive C to shore up the D and some wings who can shoot. A trade for a good wing makes sense. The points we lose with Al could be a wash. We do then have to suffer a little while through Hollins/Jawai at the C, but the offseason becomes easier. Find a C and another wing.
As for Deng/Gibson, I worry about Deng’s injury record. But, then again, the Bulls might worry about Al’s. They are a team that also has coveted a down low player offensively. They have Noah down low for D. Brad Miller is old. I like this move for the Bulls. I see them a good deal living in Chicago. They would have Rose at PG, Al down low, and some other good pieces.
I am not so sure for the Wolves, though. I would hope we could do better. So, I think it’s a no. Now, I may go Joakim Noah and Kirk Hinrich for Al. The numbers work. And now you have a defensive C who brings energy (like a lot better Hollins) and a defensive PG/SG who can get hot. Better defense inside/better defense on the perimeter.
I would still like Granger better and likely a lot others. This is the best Bulls one I could muster (cause you’re not getting Rose).
I don’t think we can get Noah either. That would have been a great asset to pick up when he struggling early last year. He’s showing offense this year, and you don’t trade 6’ 11" guys who are quick, can protect the rim and score efficiently on the other end. Hinrich would be great if we could unload Sessions, start Hinrich, and have Flynn off the bench until Rubio arrives. Deng’s contract is longer than Jefferson’s and it basically takes away our chance to convince Travis Outlaw to come here, which is really our best realistic FA option at this point. I’d rather have Outlaw.
I think the Bulls may be the most likely trade partner. They aren’t going anywhere this year, they need low post scoring to compliment Rose and I’m sure they’d love to get out of either Deng or Hinrich’s contract.
I’d love to get our hands on Noah, but I think it’s unlikely the Bulls part with him.
What about Deng, Taj Gibson or Tyrus Thomas (as back-up PF) and 2011 first round pick for Big Al?
by TWolvesFanInLA on Jan 10, 2010 10:39 PM CST up reply actions
Al could be traded
but I doubt it’ll be before this year’s trade deadline. Too soon to get good value in return, unless some team really wants to get him. With the current economic climate, NBA teams are not gonna want Al’s contract on the books as well… Pekovic might be trade bait though…
Agree that a trade probably won't happen til summer
If Kahn really did make the offer to Indy, my guess is he did so knowing word would spread. If a team makes a crazy offer before the deadline, he’ll listen. Otherwise he is just letting teams know that Al will be available next summer.
I will say this: The chances of Al being traded for Granger are basically zero
So an advanced stat analysis wouldn’t do much except maybe offer some entertainment value, and we definitely shouldn’t get our hopes up over it. Not happening.
Oh the irony
We’re now clamoring for two guys (Granger and Noah) that were available and on the radar picks for us (not like Josh Howard coming out of nowhere).
by TWolvesFanInLA on Jan 10, 2010 10:52 PM CST reply actions
McHale said he passed on Granger...
…because of the injury history. Same reason he didn’t think much of Roy.
even more ironic
as McHale’s pickes…McCants, Foye, Brewer, Love…all had relatively significant injuries.
by TWolvesFanInLA on Jan 10, 2010 10:57 PM CST up reply actions
McHale said...
…and that’s why we’re trying to dig out of this mess. I’m a lot happier with Kahn so far. Flynn — good; Rubio for Foye/Miller — good; Ellington — good; and we’ll see on Lawson pick. Sessions — so-so, backup PG; Hollins/Jawai — Blah; Pavs — Yikes!
Still way better than McHale. Garnett — Fantastic; then, it’s mostly miss and few hits.
by ChicagoViking on Jan 10, 2010 10:57 PM CST up reply actions
Did well with Cassell and Spree
But I don’t see how anybody didn’t see that going well. A talented team, playing well? Perish the thought.
Cassell
He doesn’t get hurt and we all still get to re-live our one Championship. That was a great team.
by ChicagoViking on Jan 10, 2010 11:01 PM CST up reply actions
Don't remind me
Who’d the Lakers lose to, the Pistons?
Kirby Puckett's Theory
The gentleman used to inquire of male acquaintences: “Hey meh. You like a girl who a ten? Not me, meh. I ratha have two fives.”
I’m not sure I’m on board with the Puckster’s “quantity > quality” argument for choosing . . . uh . . . lovers, but it makes sense for creating a better line-up near and long-term. There’s no reason a team on pace to win 20 games this year and not many more the next needs to pay Al $12 mill. per year. Why not trade him for two younger rookie contracts (one inside and one outside) who might not only balance the team, but also be more conducive to the Triangle, and have a bit more upside?
Basketball is different though
Kirby could play with two fives at the same time. In basketball, fewer tens are better than several fives because the number allowed to play, eh, on the court, is limited. Extras on the sideline are just eye candy.
So with more fives and fewer tens
and assuming Al is a ten (I don’t buy it, and his value will be revealed when he eventually traded), and assuming these two fives don’t make the team better, are we going to long for the days of Scowlin’ Al Jefferson and all the 20 win seasons the Wolves had while he was on the roster? I’ll take my chances.
Your taking my point a little wrong
because I addressed your argument but didn’t give my own. I don’t want Al traded for two or three pieces. If the Wolves had four tens right now, and no draft picks, it might make sense. But how many fives does this team need? They have Love, Brewer, Flynn, Rubio, Pekovic, two extra 1st rounders, and their own first rounder coming up.
If they trade Al, I want to see them get one “ten”. I would actually rather trade Al, Pekovic, and the Utah 1st rounder for another $12 million dollar player, if the other player fills a need. I would agree with you if the return includes a top 3 pick in the draft.
Also, as a fan, I have supported the salary reducing moves the Wolves have made the last couple years because Taylor has spent when they were good, and I don’t blame him for wanting to balance the ledger. However, this team’s payroll will already be one of the lowest in the league next year, even with Al. I just can’t get behind them trying to reduce payroll even more.
Okay, okay, okay
But I’m not sure I see or want what other $12 million man who is going to be out there. Even the Granger deal—I believe it makes the Wolves a little more balanced, but how does it improve the Pacers? It hardly even saves them any money unless the Wolves take back a bad contract, which I don’t think they’ll do.
I believe if this team gets to .500 organically and fans start paying real money to watch games, Glen will spend again (to some extent, and he don’t want no thugs). But for the time being, “cutting losses and hoping for a little luck (i.e. John Wall)” is going to be the guiding light.
I actually do not disagree about not
seeing many $12 million men out there to acquire. That’s why I threw in the bit about getting back a very high pick this summer. I think it may be best to wait until summer to trade Al because to get back fair value it will probably require getting a draft pick. I can’t help but think that if New Jersey thinks they can get LeBron they will want to pair him with an veteran, inside scoring threat. They might overpay and give up a high pick for Al if it means getting LeBron.
Al could also be used in a three team trade next summer to help a team facilitate a sign and trade.
I do think that
we could get more value this summer… But I still wish I knew what Kahn was doing right about now.
I think your argument..
…is going to win the day in the front office.
Forever splitting the Cheechakos from the Sourdoughs
www.canishoopus.com
Yeah--
I’d like it to be different. But the reality of running a business (even a basketball team) is different from being a fan of the team. They’re losing too much money with no sign of recovery, There are too few free agents worth paying this summer, and maybe even next. Rubio was a good idea, it just didn’t work (yet). Brewer is average at best, Flynn is Microwave 2.0, and KLove makes a third of what Jefferson does. So out Al goes to see what the market will spit back.
If the rumors have any base in reality, I’m guessing DK checked in with the representation of Pekovich and AlJeff and found out:
1. Al’s sick of losing
2. Pek’s willing to come over and play some F-C minutes for substantially less than what Al’s will be paid.
If Kahn really did offer Jefferson for Granger in light of this, good for POBO.
great point
and I agree. But Granger makes no sense from a financial standpoint as the Wolves probably have to take back money to get him. so, unless POBO believes Granger dramatically increases wins and fan interest (possible) the trade makes no sense.
Makes more sense to trade Big Al, Pavlovic, and Wilkins to Chicago for Thomas, Miller, Johnson and picks. This works in trade machine. Get Bulls 1st round pick and also grab a future second rounder or two. Bulls save no money but don’t give up any essential components to the team.
Wolves don’t get much. But do get another 1st rounder, an athletic big man, and a SF Kahn supposedly coveted. Wolves save a boatload of money and free up even more cap space.
I’m assuming Bulls do own their 1st round pick this year.
by littleboxes on Jan 10, 2010 11:47 PM CST up reply actions
I think you need more than this for Al. Thomas has been an injury prone bust who is an unrestricted free agent (I believe), Miller is expiring contract (which is fine), but Johnson hasn’t shown anything.
by TWolvesFanInLA on Jan 10, 2010 11:59 PM CST up reply actions
all true
Then wolves have to insist on Noah. But I’m skeptical that Bulls are interested in dealing Noah.
Regardless, this trade was a “suppose you had to trade Al to the Bulls trade” as opposed to a “what’s the highest return you can get for Big Al trade.” The trade is also motivated by PoorDick’s observation that the Front Office would like to spend slight less money while they win no games and draw no fans. This trade would dramatically lower the Wolves payroll next year unless they used the extra chunk of cap space (potentially $12 million of it!) to sign a max player to an absurdly large contract or to facilitate a trade.
by littleboxes on Jan 11, 2010 12:03 AM CST up reply actions
Hard to stomach
I don’t get it. Really. I just don’t know what people are thinking here.
“Hollins and Jawai” handling the Center position? Big Al and K-Love in some kind of jealousy battle?
Geez, people… get real.
Big Al is worth every penny he’s being paid. K-Love right now is worth more than what he’s paid, but that’s because the team (like all NBA teams) takes a big risk on draft picks. Remember, half of them don’t work out AT ALL.
So the team rolls the dice and picks up K-Love who gets a rookie scale contract. So what if it’s not as much as Jefferson’s right now… believe me, it’s plenty for a man to live on. Can’t believe this is SnP pushing the money side of things, that somehow it’s unfair, after writing a couple of posts about how different is it for the working man out there, compared to star athletes.
On the other hand, if K-Love is contributing the figures you expect him to by age 24 (and I agree) obviously this team will be a contender and worth it financially to pay some luxury tax. What other contenders are out there right now that aren’t putting in at least a few extra million for the chance at a real playoff run, with all the additional income that would generate? It’s just good business.
Of course that assumes that the other big contributors are also doing their part. Right now the only one the Wolves have that’s doing that, night in and night out, is Al Jefferson.
The question on my mind is: How do these rumours get started? Seems to me that some people, and I came to this page to accuse PoorDick of this very thing, are working on behalf of Kahn to soften up the fan base, with very little serious reasoning behind it, for a trade of Big Al to some other organization.
Anything to deflect attention and a serious look at the real reasons the TWolves have profited so little from the summertime trading frenzy.
I just don’t buy it. Not for a minute.
You r high!
www.twitter.com/iPhoneman76 Let's talk Wolves!
by iPhoneman76 on Jan 10, 2010 11:17 PM CST up reply actions
You got me.
I’m paid well into the six figures by the Wolves to put my random ramblings before the several dozen people who still care about the Wolves enough to argue late into the night about the merits of Luol Deng’s effective field goal percentage.
But now that I’ve come clean to you, perhaps there’s a way we can use your discovery to further the cause of the hundreds of Wolves fans spanning the globe. Perhaps for a reasonable fee (barely enough to cover expenses, really), you could put me to work using my considerable influence and connections in the Wolves front office (as well as with the Seven Lutherans in Boise) to goad DK and Taylor to give thirds of the team each to LeBron, DWade, and Chris Bosh.
Um . . .
. . . you should have received your fax by now. Did you forget to “switch over” your phone again?
Also
did you get the memo about the TPS reports? I’ll send over another copy just to make sure you have it.
"Come on Eddie, let's get serious."
Run it by me, first
and I’ll forward it on to my special inside contact in the Wolves front office—F. Hoiberg.
Uhh, I mean, “Fred H.”
PoorDick tell him to put the joint down and deal with reality...
www.twitter.com/iPhoneman76 Let's talk Wolves!
by iPhoneman76 on Jan 10, 2010 11:26 PM CST up reply actions
Always thought the "poor" half of your moniker was phony
so the post about getting vanity plates is what confirmed my suspicions. But thanks for coming clean here.
We all know that art is not the truth, art is a lie that makes us realize the truth.--Picasso
Agree with artreddin 100%
Lose big Al and you will regret it. He is the best low post scorer in the league, even as he is recovering from his major injury. Love was ‘tired’ last night. That’s why his inside shot kept getting blocked repeatedly. Love’s stats are fine, but he is no more able to make us a winning team on his own than Jefferson is. This team needs more talent without sacrificing the talent they already have. We have other ways to improve the Wolves. There will be money, expirings, and draft picks. Let them work in our favor. Consistent centers are enormously hard to come by. On most teams Jawai & Hollins would’ve been cut by now, but people want to prop them up to, albeit temporarily, replace Al. Complete foolishness.
He's the most creative low post scorer
but judging by his average-at-best shooting percentages, which while they would be helped by less usage and better teammates, wouldn’t be helped enough to make him the “best” low post scorer in the league.
Love kept getting blocked because he plays below the rim. Blaming it on being tired is just an excuse.
Money is running out, there isn’t a never-ending supply of it. Glen has been great as an owner, but he can’t keep losing money forever. Expiring contracts, as has been reported, don’t seem to be proving to be useful. Sure we can get someone, but not quite as much as we are hoping for. Draft picks are hit and miss. It’s possible we will hit, but if we miss, we are right back to where we started this year.
Consistent centers are definitely difficult to come by. I think a lot of people across the league would want a guy who can score much more efficiently while defending a whole lot better. Jefferson is good, but center can easily be called in to question. He scores and rebounds consistently in volume, but not consistently at an above average rate.
On most teams Wilkins, Pavlovic, and Brewer would have been cut by now. But you want to prop them up, albeit temporarily, to replace whomever we might get in exchange?
The problem
with dealing jefferson for a defensive center is you lose all of your inside scoring… something I don’t think Love can provide. I think love is most effective as a 2nd, even 3rd offensive option on the team and we would be a significantly worse team without jefferson’s scoring. If we dealt jefferson we would have to get a scorer back out of the deal preferably on the wing. and then we can use a first round pick on a defensive big
I definitely think that's the main thing to consider about dealing Jefferson
We’re going to miss his scoring ability…there’s really no way around that. I also think there’s a strong possibility that Love’s scoring gets worse without Al, since interior defenses will be keyed up on hi all game.
That isn’t to say that Jefferson can’t or shouldn’t be traded. But definitely something that needs to be thought over in the process.
Low post scoring
Here’s my question, and I really don’t know the answer to this so I’m open to hearing opinions on it:
Say we lose low post scoring, but significantly upgrade our perimeter and slashing scoring, or even just our perimeter scoring? What happens then? Would there be more space around the basket because more guys have to respect our outside game? Thoughts?
"Come on Eddie, let's get serious."
Depends...
how big of an upgrade are we making in the slashing/scoring department?
Every team needs inside scoring. D-Wade and LBJ can carry their teams to pretty good seasons without consistent production on the block. But Wade only won a title with a still-productive Shaq, Kobe can only win titles with Gasol or Shaq, Roy has LMA who scores well on the block — seems like even the best slashers need post scorers to carry some of the weight. If nothing else, it’s incredibly draining to slash to the bucket the whole game. On many possessions, guards want to rest and dump it inside.
Obviously, a team doesn’t need a low-block scorer as talented as Jefferson to contend. When healthy, he’s the best there is down there. But at the same time, why would you give that away when you don’t have to? I’d only do it for a guy like Granger or someone of that caliber — which won’t happen when Al isn’t 100%.
Makes sense
I’m just trying to get a feel for where the inflection point is for a low post scoring presence. What I mean is that there’s a point at which teams respect your low post scoring and a point at which they feel as though they can cheat out on other players and not respect your inside game. Seems as though most teams make due without great low post scoring, so in broad terms it would seem as though having ‘good enough’ low post scoring with better wing scoring is a viable option. That’s what I’m trying to wrap my head around right now – how much would the balance have to shift in terms of better perimeter wing scoring if we gave up Al’s scoring, and more in general basketball terms instead of specifically the Wolves.
I should also point out that I belong in the camp that wants to see Pekovic here, and furthermore believes that Pek would offer enough inside scoring to keep defenses honest and maintain some space for KLove. I don’t think he’ll be as productive as Al, but I do think he stands a reasonable chance of playing 15-20 minutes a game and putting up a consistent 10-12 points a game (with the occasional 18-24 point outing) and 7-9 rebounds a night. His scoring could go up another 1-3 points a night if it turns out he’s either pretty efficient or really good at drawing FTAs (or both). So again, given that optimistic context, I’m just trying to wrap my head around whether or not I believe that is enough to make Al (in this limited scope) expendable?
Note: I am not saying Pek is better than Al or anything like that. I’m simply looking at both player’s contributions as inside scorers and wondering about that in relation to KLove and wing scoring.
"Come on Eddie, let's get serious."
by biggity2bit on Jan 11, 2010 10:51 AM CST up reply actions
last year 13 wins and 10 losses before jefferson's injury. Mostly beat non-playoff teams. 7 wins and 23 losses after Jefferson was injured. A few of those wins at the end of the season to "tanking" teams.
of those 30 games at the end of the season, 15 were against non-playoff teams, the ones we went 13 & 10 against when jefferson was healthy.
Post scoring makes everyone else around you better because you get open shots or one on one coverage. When a player like Jefferson is being constantly double and triple team, it makes offense for everyone else easier.
by Kevin Love Jefferson on Jan 11, 2010 10:58 AM CST up reply actions
I respect your comments
but it doesn’t really help me get closer to understanding where the inflection point is. Big Al is on the far end of the spectrum of low post scoring. Where’s the point below which everyone starts suffering noticeably?
"Come on Eddie, let's get serious."
by biggity2bit on Jan 11, 2010 11:07 AM CST up reply actions
If the "big man" demands a double or triple team and can still score consistently about 50% there isn't a problem.
if Pekovic for example didn’t demand a triple or double team or couldn’t score consistently through that coverage, thats where it causes a “relative” problem.
by Kevin Love Jefferson on Jan 11, 2010 11:10 AM CST up reply actions
So let's extend this to a different player
The issue with Craig Smith, then, isn’t his ability to score inside per se, but rather his ability to draw consistent double teams and score effectively despite those double teams, right?
I think Pekovic, in this case, is superior to Craig Smith as a prospect due simply to his size at the very least. I guess I don’t know how much EL teams double team big guys. Seems like everyone there should know exactly what Pek is going to do, and the fact that he still does it to me suggests that he should be able to score through a double team here as well.
How about this scenario: is there a difference/still an impact if a low post scorer isn’t double teamed and absolutely kills the other team by scoring? (We could call this the Craig Smith effect, and while that sounds pretty dubious it can’t be denied that Craig Smith won us some games last year. Pek’s height would hopefully offset some of the losses Craig Smith brought us on the defensive end).
"Come on Eddie, let's get serious."
by biggity2bit on Jan 11, 2010 11:32 AM CST up reply actions
"a significantly worse team without jefferson’s scoring"
The Wolves are the worst team in the league, except for a team that may set an NBA record for futility. How much worse can they get?
Thats true
I mean that if you replace Jefferson with Love on this team we are even worse. Love needs to work off of other players- which is not a bad thing if you have other players to work off of, which we don’t. if we’re trading Jefferson we’d have to get an established defensive center, scoring wing or a high first round draft pick in order to let Al go. We need to get both those pieces in the Al trade or offseason regardless in order to become a contender down the road
by NuthinBurger on Jan 10, 2010 11:54 PM CST up reply actions
Well,
I agree that Love’s stats will suffer without a player of Al’s stature—especially/at least at the beginning. But wouldn’t the player(s) coming back at least partially offset Al’s loss scoring and rebounding?
Because if the Wolves trade Al for nothing, and begin to lose games by exactly Al’s scoring everage subtracted from their total points, then, no, I don’t want to trade him.
Right
but if this little tiff between Al and Love creates a firesale where we trade Al at the first deal that gets offered we won’t get either back. Trading one of the best players on this team and getting Tyrus Thomas as a main piece back makes no sense. Neither does Deng in the triangle- which we seem married to…. I think our best bet is to wait till this summer to trade anyone, banking on the fact that Big Al gets healthy again and his trade value goes up… This has little argument has gone further than planned but yeah…
by NuthinBurger on Jan 11, 2010 12:13 AM CST up reply actions
Depends on the player
A perimeter scorer like Granger won’t help Love a whole lot. But he’d definitely make up for Al’s scoring in the box score most nights.
This feels like McHale's last hurrah
Of course Taylor was probably pulling McHale’s strings at the time. Who didn’t see this coming the minute the deal was announced sending Mayo to Memphis for Love? I’m not criticizing that trade here, at the time I thought that the contract savings made sense from the Wolves standpoint. The fact Love is probably as good or better than Mayo just makes it better. However, most people realized that long term either Love or Al was going to have to get moved. It was just another example of how the McHale admin lost any concept of building a team at the end. They had about seven tweeners who were some kind of SG, then had two of their best players at PF!
I spent most of the summer thinking Al would stay and Love would be the trade bait, but it seems that they are implementing a system that fits Love better than Al. I don’t blame Kahn or Rambis, something was going to change one way or another. I also don’t blame Al for being upset. A year ago he was a near All-Star who then suffered a major injury. From the time he arrived in Minny he had McHale planning to build a team around him. He pretty much did what was asked of him by McHale, and then everything changed while he was rehabbing. The fact is, it appears to be in the best interest of Al and the Wolves to move him to a team that has good perimeters defenders and shooters, but needs an inside scorer.
Blog A Bull
Just read some of the comments on a similar post of theirs and for the most part seem very willing to part with Deng, and either Thomas or Salmons depending for Jefferson
Yeah…I read some of these postings as well. They seem very excited at the prospect of simply getting out of Deng’s contract. That’s concerning.
by TWolvesFanInLA on Jan 11, 2010 12:33 AM CST up reply actions
Was just about to say that
Bulls fans have clamored about getting rid of Deng for years now….it’s a definite red flag in my mind when an entire fanbase thinks very little about a particular player.
they also seem to think he’d be particularly bad in the triangle.
by TWolvesFanInLA on Jan 11, 2010 12:39 AM CST up reply actions
You read it here first...
Al and Love play the same position. And Flynn is not a point guard.
Why is this news??
If (when) we do move Al
particularly for a SF type like Granger It changes the FA and draft requirements significantly.
Does Cole Aldrich zoom up the list?
Do we look for a veteran FA centre as well?
"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
What if not an established player?
It is more likely that the Wolves would not get an established player back. For example, rather than having to eat Deng’s contract from the Bulls, why not acquire Thomas, Miller, and Johnson plus a first round pick and maybe a second round pick. I’m not saying a Bulls trade is the best trade, but it seems unlikely that the Wolves will be able to get back any significant missing piece (dynamic wing, defensive center) by trading Big Al. But they could pick up more cap space, a few young players, and draft picks.
It’s easy to overvalue draft picks, so I should be careful. But this type of deal saves the Wolves a ton of money and gives them possible four picks in the upcoming draft. Could easily draft a wing and a center with those picks.
Now this makes the wolves even younger and possibly more unwatchable. But it saves them money and if they think Jeff + Love is not a championship frontcourt, better to start over now.
But this type of thing only flies if Wolves really want to save money and take a shot at rebuilding their front court.
Depends largely on the Pekovic situation
I’d definitely think Favors moves up our draft list. He is the consensus BPA at #2, so it’s possible that if we get the number 2 pick, he becomes our choice instead of Turner. It’s also possible that we find ourselves in a position where Turner, Johnson, or Henry are still the BPA and we still take them. We need 2 wings for sure, so it almost opens up more opportunities for fit and BPA drafting. Aldrich is a difficult player to judge. Just wrote a fanpost about the game today and I really couldn’t tell about him. There are quite a few other bigs in the draft so options are open.
move AL for gilbert arenas
washington gets out of gilbert contract and bad press
we go to arbitration lose Gilbert contract anyway win win
Every trade proposed so far has been HORRIBLE.
Doesn’t anyone understand how NBA finances work? A lot of this is really basic stuff.
-Luol Deng, with his contract, has neutral value at best.
-Tyrus Thomas has zero value to us in a trade. We’re not trying to win anything this year. If we want him for any year beyond that, we’d have to sign him out of free agency, so it makes no difference there either.
-Someone else proposed Kirk Hinrich. Are you serious?
In an ideal world, Al would be moved in a fair deal with a better fit. If such a deal existed, it might have been done already, but it doesn’t. There’s no need to rip yourself off out of impatience. What are we trying to accomplish this year anyway?
Agreed
Am I the only one who wants nothing to do with any of the Bulls (assuming that Rose is not in the discussion here)? I couldn’t stand that punk Noah in college, and haven’t improved my opinion of him at all. He’s a bench player. I think my head would explode if I had to watch a team out him and Corey out on the court at the same time. The Wolves are a horribly offensively deficient team, and we’d swap for a guy who, if I read correctly, his own team realizes they can’t go far without upgrading his position? And what has Thomas ever accomplished, aside from proving he’s a poor match with Noah in the front court?
Maybe it’s proximity that has this board jumping toward the Bulls, but with a pleasant geographic distance from the windy city, they are about the last team I’d think of when contemplating trading one of our truly valuable assets.
So putting your personal dislike for Noah aside
what don’t you like about his game? Not being an offensive machine? I understand where you are coming from, but I think we have to look to replace the offense via the wings. If we get a C who can anchor the post defense, we are set at that position apart from maybe a highly athletic guy with more skill than Hollins.
Also, however offensively deficient we are as a team, we are worse at defense. Noah (and Deng and Heinrich, not that I want either of these guys per se) would bring an automatic boost to the defensive end.
I don't see how we can afford one-way players
Seriously, you ship a guy out for having only an offensive game and bring in a guy with no offense at all (forget the machine)? And I don’t think he’s that great a defensive player. Good for mobility, covering screens etc. but in my view he’s not strong enough for great post up play on either end of the court. Add in questinoable decision making. I think you can afford defense only players when there are not enough shots to go around, not when you are arguably the worst offensive team in the league. Look I wouldn’t propose an offense-only player for this team either. I just don’t think the Wolves have the luxury of forfeiting any amount of competence at all. Now if these great efficient scoring wings magically appear then we can revisit this, but if you don’t acquire them for Jefferson, I’m not sure where you’re getting them.
Please don't behead my wife, but
John Doe, not every trade proposed was HORRIBLE. They just have different goals.
Consider PoorDick’s point that Mr. Taylor wants to spend less money while his team sucks.
A. Taylor wants to significantly reduce payroll. There’s your NBA finances.
Consider next the opinion that Al and Love cannot play together on a championship team.
B. Both AL and KLove will not be on the team in 2-3 years (if Kahn’s plan is to compete for a championship).
C. Big Al has the highest salary on the team and he has a reasonably effective low cost replacement already on the roster.
A, B, & C certainly at least imply that the Wolves would be interested in a trade that moved big Al’s salary, reduced payroll, produced draft picks, and some young talent.
The Wolves certainly could try to find a deal to get back a big time player with a friendly contract, but you are correct that that deal probably does not exist.
But a deal motivated by A, B, C does exist and it certainly deserves serious consideration, especially if reducing payroll is important to Mr. Taylor.
by littleboxes on Jan 11, 2010 12:32 PM CST up reply actions
I've got your trade right here...but it's way out there...
Find me some way to get Jefferson to the Nets for their pick. That way if they can only pick up LeBron, they have Harris, Lee, LeBron, Jefferson, and Lopez, which is a killer starting 5. We then package our lower picks to move up and grab Aldrich, while taking Wall and Turner with the 1-2. Then we go after Gay in FA.
yes, I know it’s laughable, but it’s been a cold winter and every once in a while you have to think of swinging for the fence, not just “upgrades”. The problem is that we’re probably not ready to swing yet.
by Cedarpenguin on Jan 11, 2010 12:59 PM CST up reply actions
I don't think this is really that "out there"
At least the part about trading for the New Jersey first rounder. The Wall part perhaps. I am convinced that the Wolves could go into the lottery with three picks with the best odds, and still wind up drafting #4, #5, and #6.
That said, if New Jersey really believes they can get a star in free agency, who is that star going to want to play with, a 19 year old drafted in the top 3, or a proven, dominant inside offensive player?
I can definitely see New Jersey bringing in someone “like” Al at the deadline for that 1st rounder, for two reasons. One they can salvage the last 30 games and keep Lopez et al happy, not to mention bring their fans some hope. Also, they have the selling point of telling a free agent all the pieces are in place if you sign.
Very much agreed. People can keep going wild with trade proposals, but the bottom line is that all we know thus far is there’s an unsubstantiated rumor that Kahn offered Al for Granger. That’s a relatively even deal, so can you fault him for throwing it out there? It doesn’t in any way indicate that Kahn is looking to move him for garbage like Thomas and Hinrich.
When I get sad, I stop being sad and be awesome instead. True story.
Kahn said just a few days ago in an interview that he has made NO TRADE CALLS since September. Someone should ask him this question again.
He also said in in interview 2 days ago (ESPN podcast), that no major moves will be made until next summer. So is this NBA writers or rival GM’s “trying to stir the pot” or REAL?
Don’t know!
Wish someone would ask Kahn the “trade calls” question again.
I absolutely don’t believe the jealousy angle for Al and Love, unless as S&P said, its from the agent saying, Love will want his money matching or beating that of Jefferson.
I personally don’t think money is a big deal for Taylor. He paid big money for the team when KG was here. I think he would do it again, if the wolves would win a championship.
by Kevin Love Jefferson on Jan 11, 2010 7:43 AM CST reply actions
Before Al was injured the wolves went 13 and 10 basically beating non-playoff teams. After he was hurt they went 7 & 23.
15 of the 30 games the wolves played after he was hurt were to non-playoff teams, the same types they beat up when Al was healthy. And some of those wins were to teams tanking at the end of the season.
by Kevin Love Jefferson on Jan 11, 2010 7:54 AM CST reply actions
I continue to believe that Love and jefferson can play together. If Love wants similar money to Jefferson or even more money,
the wolves can afford to pay it. If we had 4 guys making $15 million each and another $20 million for the rest of the roster. The wolves have had payrolls of that magnitude in the past.
In 2006-7 the wolves payroll was $66.9 million
In 2005-6 the wolves payroll was 61.9 million
In 2004-5, the wolves payroll was over $70 million.
2003-4 the wolves payroll was $75 million
In 2002-3 the wolves payroll was $59.5 million
by Kevin Love Jefferson on Jan 11, 2010 8:10 AM CST reply actions
those teams won games at the front end of those signings..
….this team has not. those teams had full arenas and big time jersey sales with KG. this team does not. could it get back to what it was? yes, but it’s a long ways away.
Forever splitting the Cheechakos from the Sourdoughs
www.canishoopus.com
jersey sales
It seems like that should be as big a consideration as wins going forward. As much as we all love the big piranha, are the other 1200 fans not represented here clamoring for his jersey? Outside of Wall and Turner, can anyone have that kind of impact?
by midlife crisis on Jan 11, 2010 9:08 AM CST up reply actions
I thought jersey sales went to the League - NBA - and were split among all NBA teams, not to a particular team.
That way teams would not be upset when “certain players” were hyped by the NBA publicity machine to help the league.
by Kevin Love Jefferson on Jan 11, 2010 9:15 AM CST up reply actions
If this team has a good roster that is winning and fans are not showing up then the team will move.
Taylor’s plan has to be, build a winning team and fans will support it…. the “field of dreams strategy”.
If that strategy doesn’t work, then Minneapolis isn’t enough of a basketball town to support a team.
by Kevin Love Jefferson on Jan 11, 2010 9:18 AM CST up reply actions
And uh
Kansas City is? This league is more likely to face contraction than to see a bunch of teams picking up stakes and heading elsewhere.
This league needs contraction
Of course I hope the Wolves are not one of the contracted. The league has been watered down since teams were added. Too many teams for the premium player talent available.
Las Vegas is the next NBA city. - can fill seats and popular with NBA players.
A team there would have free agents lining up down the street. Maybe more popular than Los Angeles, Miami and New York.
by Kevin Love Jefferson on Jan 13, 2010 5:20 AM CST up reply actions
Isn't the bottom line
That Kahn / Rambis have made it pretty clear that winning this year (i.e., getting a high pick now before we lose it to the Clippers) isn’t high on the priority list. They want to see what they have with these players and then can make moves in the offseason.
This to me seems both consistent with what Kahn is saying (though I think he’s savvy enough to keep quiet about what is really going on) and is entirely logical.
As much as I’d like Granger (and if he was really avalaible you’d have to seriously consider it), I don’t think this team is going to do much that is going to make it too competitive at this point — I think they like where they are in regards to lottery position / chances (right now no worse than top 5), and it wouldn’t take too many extra wins to get them close to the Wizards/Warriors of the world.
So count me in on the fact that these rumors are just that — agents or rival teams trying to stir the pot to see if they can make something happen (see: Rubio, Ricky last summer).
I suspect Al won't get traded at least until the summer
but let’s ask this: what is Al’s value around the league, AND what is the value of more cap space to the Wolves?
I suspect that Al’s value is not so great; he hasn’t been at his best this season as he recovers from injury, and, well, he’s never played for a winning team. That suggests that trading him doesn’t make sense; why trade a guy if his value is low?
What if, however, you could trade him for expiring contracts? The immediate reaction is no; Jefferson is too talented a player to let go for cap space. But is that really true? We’ve been questioning the value of cap space for the Wolves, but if you can go into the off-season with $20+ million in cap space even including the cap holds, what opportunities does that afford you, in both the free agency and trade markets?
Obviously, the Wolves are hamstrung in the FA market due to being bad and being Minnesota, but having cap space during a year when a lot of teams are going to be hesitant to spend given the NBA economy might allow some acquisitions without overpaying.
I dunno. I find it hard to figure out what to do. Here’s what I do know: this team is bad. I don’t know that it makes sense to blame the best (or 2nd best) player for that, but as Branch Rickey told Ralph Kiner once, we can finish last without you as easily as we can finish last with you.
This team is awful, and needs significantly more talent at virtually every position on the roster in order to get where we would all like it to go. Realistically, with or without Jefferson, it’s likely that there is one (1) starting position filled by the current roster for the next good Wolves team, that being power forward. Everywhere else requires an upgrade. Trading Al for space increases the opportunities to make upgrades.
by Eric in Madison on Jan 11, 2010 9:27 AM CST reply actions
Good points and questions...
Another way to look at it is to consider what sort of team we’d be with Dwayne Wade or Brandon Roy at shooting guard, and if in that situation you’d rather have Al Jefferson or cap space.
We aren’t going to contend for a title until we add a player like Wade or Roy. I would say James or Bryant, but those are once-in-a-decade talents that it’s just not realistic to expect to get.
The obvious candidate to be the next star guard is John Wall — so if we get John Wall, would you rather have Al Jefferson or $0.75 on the dollar that we get back in a trade?
I think we’re pretty well-positioned to move forward with Love-Jefferson in the short-to-medium term. If we’re getting ousted in the second round of the playoffs because Aldridge and Oden are too tall up front, then we can move accordingly.
I think your last paragraph is absolutely dead-on.
Jefferson and Love are both really good. And they’re the only two players on the team you can say that about. So what if there’s some positional overlap? You do not solve the issues facing the team by selling low on one of the team’s two very good players. There’s enough other assets in play that it’s not necessary or smart. We can build a playoff caliber team with the assets we have without trading Al. If the short frontcourt duo is keeping us from moving from playoff team to championship team, then you change it.
But for now, I’m not willing to go from two indisputably good NBA players on this team to one. It’s just backwards. (This is all targeted at the Jefferson-for-Noah-and-Thomas talk. Al for Granger I would do in a heartbeat.)
Could be
I think we’re pretty well-positioned to move forward with Love-Jefferson in the short-to-medium term. If we’re getting ousted in the second round of the playoffs because Aldridge and Oden are too tall up front, then we can move accordingly.
We can build a playoff caliber team with the assets we have without trading Al.
I guess this is the question. I’m not certain I disagree, but perhaps I have a more pessimistic view of where this team is right now. They are really, really, bad. Furthermore, I don’t see a ton of young talent that could emerge as above average NBA talent. So perhaps I’m more willing to consider continuing to really blow up the team, because I have a hard time seeing how this team gets to that playoff caliber/2nd round caliber any other way.
I dunno. Maybe I’m wrong. And of course I’ve been one of the top proponents that they need to win, that being truly awful is not good for anyone. Of course, seeing as how they are really terrible, (which was my fear in the preseason), I’m wondering why they should hang on to their highest paid guy.
by Eric in Madison on Jan 11, 2010 11:12 AM CST up reply actions
Yes...
but I honestly think we have an incredibly weak backcourt (much-weaker than last year with Bassy-Foye-Miller) and a pretty good and rapidly improving (due to Love’s youth and Jefferson’s rehab) front court.
Thinking of the games where we have played well against good teams, it’s almost always when Flynn and Brewer produce some numbers. If we had guys that did that consistently (the way our front line guys do) I think we’d be a much-better team.
Flynn gets a pass because he’s a rookie, but guys like Brewer, Sasha, Gomes, etc cannot really be considered starting-caliber perimeter players. Maybe Brewer or Gomes could start next to a superstar guard, but that isn’t happening here at this point. The next draft and Rubio’s arrival will hopefully add a great perimeter player. In a perfect world, that combination would net two great perimeter players. Regardless, I’d like to have a dominating low-block scorer if and when that time comes.
Wouldn't trading Al for cap space...
…just put the Wolves even with the Knicks for space? At that point, minus their best low post scorer, what in the world would attract a FA to MN over NY? The chance to catch outlet passes from Love? Or watch Jonny Flynn dribble? What worthwhile FA would ignore MN over NY when both teams would be equally crappy?
Well
the Wolves are currently crappier than the Knicks, and in a less appealing market. Why would an FA come to MN with or without Jefferson? I’m not arguing for it; I’m wondering whether the extra cap space would allow for better acquisitions.
by Eric in Madison on Jan 11, 2010 10:58 AM CST up reply actions
Wolves currently have...
…more young talent (at least in my eyes) with potential than the Knicks. And it’s all centered around Al. The way I see it, the draw to a FA wing is that they get a bona-fide low post scorer that can take pressure off of them and balance the offense.
Two questions:
Is Jefferson’s trade value at or below expirings?
Would we be able to sign someone better than Jefferson for his money?
The answer to both is clearly no.
Diminishing value
I think we’ll all agree that Jefferson’s trade value was higher last year, and potentially even higher than that two years ago. And it is not just the injury. Jefferson’s defensive and passing shortcomings have been exposed. And the league is becoming increasingly reluctant to give near max contracts to non-superstar players (like Jefferson).
Unless we are willing to showcase Al and retard the development of the rest of our roster (ie last year’s model), Jefferson’s value will continue to decline.
You don't think Jefferson' value would increase just from getting healthier?
Jefferson said after the bulls game that his injured knee was killing him so he had difficulty moving. As that stops being a problem, you don’t think his trade value increases?
Maybe jefferson should sit for a week and give his knee time to heal.
But we saw what happened last year when Jefferson sat. The wolves went from 13 wins and 10 losses to 7 wins and 23 losses and even some of those 7 wins were suspect since they were to “tanking” teams.
by Kevin Love Jefferson on Jan 11, 2010 10:03 AM CST up reply actions
Not really
Because I think it happens while he puts up three year lows in points and rebounds on one of the top 3 worst teams in the league….and the picture becomes clear…1) never played significant minutes on a winning team (or even a mediocre one for that matter 2) lacks crucial aspects in his game 3) is 25 and likely has peaked 4) that “bargain” contract is starting to look a bit steep.
It's like you're reading my mind
except you express my swirling thoughts on trading Al Jefferson with more articulatenessicity than I can.
Point 4 (and 3)
Is his contract really looking steep? Over the past 5 games he’s averaging exactly 20 and 10, and I think given his solid production night in and night out he’s very reasonably signed. I guess my only thought is that worries about his contract are coming across to me as a grass greener on the other side type thing, meaning that we’re all a little bummed about him and not getting Granger or whatever it might be and now think that his contract is bad or not an asset. I think he’s very fairly compensated for an inside player who gives you 20 and 10 night in and night out, even while recovering from ACL surgery. Besides, it’s not like he’s a max contract guy. He’ll be making 75-80% of a max guy, which still leaves $2-3 million or more for other players. I guess, to me, I wouldn’t call his contract steep, but I guess I wouldn’t really call it an asset either. Kinda depends on how you look at it, I guess.
Also, perhaps he has ‘peaked’ at age 25, if by peaked you mean that he’s settled in for the next 5-7 year range of producing 20+ points and 10+ rebounds a night. I hope ‘peaked’ didn’t mean to imply that he’s slowly going to downgrade from here. My guess is you were suggesting that he is what he is at this point, and I would agree, even if I may be a bit more optimistic on his production over the long haul.
"Come on Eddie, let's get serious."
by biggity2bit on Jan 11, 2010 11:04 AM CST up reply actions
To play devil's advocate
how much less green could any other grass be? I’m on a campaign today to get us to face how terrible this team really is. We used to say “Thank god we aren’t Memphis. Thaink god we aren’t the Knicks. Thank god we aren’t the Clippers.”
Well, the Knicks are actually competing for a playoff spot and have a lot of cap space next summer; Memphis is playing .500 ball in the West, as are the Clippers who have yet to see the consensus most talented rookie play for them.
The Wolves are the 2nd worst team in the league, and while there are some assets to use to get better, they have to get A LOT better.
by Eric in Madison on Jan 11, 2010 11:21 AM CST up reply actions
And to play it again...
if we’re already this bad, and having nothing to gain in the way of lottery balls, why ship away our best scorer when we can’t get full value in return?
Unlike the KG situation, where we made the decision to rebuild and “get worse before we get better” we gain nothing by shipping Jefferson. He’s young, his contract is reasonable and when healthy he’s the team’s best player. I don’t see any good in losing that.
EinM, I get your campaign. My only humorous response is “Thank God we’re not the Nelly Warriors or the Arenas Wizards.” But our grass is greener due to other reasons than talent where those two teams are concerned.
AndyG, trading Al now definitely is not maximizing value. Agreed. Outside of afore mentioned Granger type deal, might as well keep Al and roll through the draft and see what comes out. Lots of time to get this roster into shape. The more I think about it, especially given what we’re hearing about Rubio lately, I’m beginning to think that Rambis and Kahn are focused on 3 years from now (and actively selling Taylor on that idea while also trying to mitigate financial obligations. We’ll see if I’m right about the financial obligations thing, but I bet we don’t sign a big FA or take on any long term contracts this year. We’ll see). In three years Rubio will be primed to come over as the centerpiece or ‘final’ piece of a team primed for the playoffs. The roster will be remade to maximize his talents, meaning it’ll be more athletic, longer, and with notably better shooters and cutters/finishers. Between now and then, though, it’s probably going to look a little wonky. Just my hunch though.
Finally, DougW, right on about what was fair in ‘07 ain’t so fair in ‘10. If we’re to embrace EinM’s campaign to face the reality of this team (it’s bad), then we probably need to face the current reality of what Al’s contract is worth and not remember it in terms of how good a deal it was back when it was signed. Very valid observation. On a slight aside, it just really makes me wonder about Pekovic. In my mind an argument is forming that what Kahn does with Pekovic will be really telling about what the next two years of Twolves basketball will look like. I’ve just stated that I think Rambis and Kahn are building towards Rubio, and perhaps Pek will be a piece of evidence for or against this hypothesis of mine. The simple thinking is – you want a great roster dovetailed to Rubio in 2-3 years. To make that work Taylor has to be appeased because of the continued crappiness of the team until that point (that is, he’s going to lose money). Ergo replacing Al with Pek makes great financial sense. I know there’s more to it than that, but I have to believe that if we were about winning 40 games next year Pek and a pick could land us a good player right now to get there, and I just don’t see that as an option Kahn would do. I think he and Rambis really are committed to being good the year after next year at the earliest. We’ll see, I guess.
"Come on Eddie, let's get serious."
by biggity2bit on Jan 11, 2010 11:45 AM CST up reply actions
So you think his numbers while recoverying from major surgery are his peak?
If Kahn hadn’t broken up that team last summer, they are 500 hundred this year. In their 13 wins and 10 losses stretch they should they were good enough to consistently beat non-playoff teams. About half of all games are against non-playoff teams.
NBA players don’t even reach their peak until they are 27 yo.
Aren’t we lucky that he wasn’t greedy about his contract. But rather than treat him with respect all most fans do is trash him.
I just hope he has an opportunity to win a title somewhere. He’s a stand up guy and deserves better than what many fans have said about him.
by Kevin Love Jefferson on Jan 11, 2010 10:50 AM CST reply actions
Relax . . .
you’re one of the most blindly-loyal Wolves fans on this board, so if/when Al gets traded, I’m sure the CH mods will let you alter your user name to something more current. ;)
It just frustrates me to see a "stand up guy" trashed.
Jefferson is one of the best “character” guys in the NBA. Always supports his coach and teammates.
Always called a “loser” because he has never been on a winning team. But he’s also never had the talent around him. In an early rebuild in boston and now twice in Minnesota.
With a few exceptions like Lebron, CP3 etc, most players surrounded by the wolves talent would win about the same number of games as Jefferson has won.
The guy gave a “home town discount” and nobody gives him any credit at all.
by Kevin Love Jefferson on Jan 11, 2010 11:06 AM CST up reply actions
"Always supports his coach and teammates"
I really like the contributions and effort you bring to this site. But among the several statements you have made about Al’s value to the team, this one is the most questionable to anyone who has watched him play over the past three years.
I don’t blame him for getting frustrated, but his on-court histrionics in his teammates’ faces have almost become a cliche.
No...
I’ll grant you that he went over the line with Foye a time or two, but showing frustration amidst a 20-win season is normal and expected. Kobe and LeBron get at least as mad as Jefferson when their teams struggle and they are in far-better situations than Minnesota’s.
Did you ever see LeBron’s faces at Drew Gooden? I’m not sure that Jefferson’s are any worse than that.
I'm glad you're here, Andy.
You’re one of the few voices of reason amidst the screams of “Al Jefferson stinks! Let’s trade him for Hilton Armstrong!”
There have been people advocating an Al Jeff for Joakim Noah straight up deal
It’s not going to be long before we decend into Hilton Armstrong territory…
I wish you were an NBA GM
So Kahn could trade you Jefferson in a sweet rip off deal! :)
That works for both of us then.
I’ll trade you the next Todd Macculloch (Noah’s ceiling, btw), along with James Jones and Lindsey Hunter (both expiring) for one of the top 10 post players in the league.
To be fair
Joakim Noah is like a defensive Al Jefferson. His ability to score in the low post is terrible, but he’s longer, more athletic, and is a top-notch defender and rebounder. I think we could do better, but he’s just as much of a defensive stud as Al is an offensive one. He’s a much better player than people realize and is a better fit next to Love.
Correction
His ability to score in the low post is terrible unless Al Jefferson is guarding him. Then he shoots 9 of 13.
Jefferson said after that game his knee was "killing" him. Thats why he couldn't run or move well laterally.
Thats why Rambis sat him and Love. [Without jefferson playing Love wouldn’t push the wolves over the top against the bulls without support.]
by Kevin Love Jefferson on Jan 13, 2010 5:24 AM CST up reply actions
I say
Let’s trade him for Paris Hilton.
"Come on Eddie, let's get serious."
by biggity2bit on Jan 11, 2010 11:46 AM CST up reply actions
(response to proposed Hilton Armstrong trade).
"Come on Eddie, let's get serious."
by biggity2bit on Jan 11, 2010 11:46 AM CST up reply actions
I didn't think it needed to be said that Hilton Armstrong
was thrown in as an exaggeration, but apparently it does.
Do us a favor
I have read your copy and pasted opinion of how Al Jefferson lead us to a 13-10 record about 10 times now and it’s not becoming any more convincing. We get it.
New Story on ESPN
A few nuggets from this morning.
"As I’ve said publicly," Kahn told ESPN.com, "I have no intention of trading any of our core players this season."
No such discussions have taken place according to Kahn, who said Monday: "I spoke to [Pacers president] Larry Bird in person Friday in between our shootarounds for 20 minutes and neither player’s name was ever mentioned."
I think it’s entirely possible that none of these discussions took place with Bird, and I think people have covered why Indiana would be loathe to trade there franchise player. The fact that Kahn used to work for the Pacers and that Granger seems like a pipe dream leads me to believe that this information was leaked to set an initial value for the league in terms of a Jefferson trade. Based on this story teams know that Big Al is on the block and that if you want to make an offer, it’s going to take a Granger like deal to get the Wolves interest.
I don't think Kahn is the one behind the rumours!
I think its other NBA GM’s who want to get jefferson or love. They are trying to cause disruption on the team and create a trade market so they can get better at the wolves expense on the cheap.
by Kevin Love Jefferson on Jan 11, 2010 11:37 AM CST up reply actions
So if Kahn doesn't want to trade Jefferson
he’s going to read stories about rumors about trading Jefferson, and then Kahn’s going to start thinking about trading Jefferson?
Haha, nice. Kahn’s going to get peer pressured into trading his highest paid player. As someone who worked for the Media and has knowledge of how this all works and how stories get leaked, this seems like his doing all the way. The fact he was prepared to give an interview to rival internet news site the next morning makes me think he is playing both sides of this to get his message out to other GM’s.
I think Kahn is a straight shooter - I believe what he says!
by Kevin Love Jefferson on Jan 11, 2010 11:57 AM CST up reply actions
If he says yes
I think we have an idea for a halfcourt halftime show on CanisHoopus night at Target Center. I promise I won’t wear white to the game.
Additionally, this also helps in that if we trade Al for expirings and draft picks, causing this uproar for the only dedicated fans left that the team sold low and could have got Granger, Noah, or someone else the team can say we tried to make the deal, but it takes two tango and this was the best out there for jealous Al Jefferson
Jealous Jefferson
I love it. That would have to be the funniest/dumbest sports nickname of all time.
I am surprised Just A Fan hasn't
posted something. JAF – you there?
"It's tough to make predictions, especially about the future." -- Yogi Berra
It'd be nice to hear his input, but at the same time
don’t hold your breath on it being anything revealing. Just because he has a friend in the FO doesn’t mean that friend knows who Kahn calls and what he calls them about.
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.
