Are you afraid to make this trade?
by PoorDick on Jan 21, 2010 11:58 AM CST
115 comments
My first preference for improving this team is for Glen and POBO to break the bank and go after some veteran talent with big paychecks. That isn't happening.
The next favorite way to get better is to trade our oldest most expensive major asset (Al Jefferson) for several younger picks and prospects. That requires another interested team or two or three who can swing the deal. It also requires a great deal more patience for the remaining Wolves fan fanbase.
But if Al can't/won't be moved, there is another potential trade that might make you say, "Gulp!"
The Wolves send Kevin Love (I know, I know) and Jonny Flynn to the Memphis Grizzlies for Marc Gasol and Rudy Gay.
Here's why Memphis does this deal:
- The team is afraid of Gay getting a max-size deal from a team with cap room, and then the Grizz get nothing in return if they don't match.
- Conley is a nice point guard, but doesn't set the world on fire. Flynn is a fallback in case the Memphis decides to trade Conley (Portland?) or not re-up the guy.
- The Grizzlies already love Love, as they drafted him before the trade for Mayo.
- Love's presence also gives them a backup plan for ZBo reverting to himself, or asking for too much money in two years.
Minnesota's motives:
- Gasol is an ideal center to play next to Al, who despite his position designation has actually played some PF in the past.
- Moving Flynn removes another rumored obstacle to getting Rubio to come over sooner, rather than later or never.
- Having another young Spaniard on the team certainly will make Minnesota more attractive to Rubio.
- Gay becomes easier/more likely to be the Wolves big FA signing this summer, with the age, skills, and attitude that fit in with this developing team.
- The team can see how they run with a little more defensive help down low, and scoring from the wing. If it works, then the primary target can be a shooter/defender at the two position.
All that said, I love Love too much as a player and a person to see him moved. But you have to admit, this is an intriguing proposition . . .
0 recs |
115 comments
Email
Print
Comments
Interesting aside...
you love Love too much as a player “and a person”. Maybe you’re cool with him like that, but I don’t know Kevin Love well enough to love him or hate him “as a person”.
As for the trade, it makes a lot of sense, but for some reason, I’m not sold on it. Every time I try to think of why I don’t like it, though, I draw a blank. So maybe you’re onto something.
by TimAllen on Jan 21, 2010 12:11 PM CST reply actions 0 recs
I feel the same way about the trade you do.
On paper, it looks interesting. But if I saw it on this site as a done deal (and in the Strib a few days later), I wouldn’t be outraged, but I would be disappointed to lose Love.
And although I’ve met Love and talked to him and by all accounts he seems to be a good guy, I don’t know that he’s not cheating on Tiger Woods’ wife.
by PoorDick on Jan 21, 2010 12:27 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs
why is gasol a perfect fit
He is not very tall and I’m sure Love can out rebound gasol. Theres a lot more centers out there that would be a much better fit than Gasol. Gasol’s a back to the basket player and so is Al Jefferson. i really don’t think Gasol is a good fit at all with our team especially if we’re trying to start an up-tempo offense. Even though I’m not a big kevin love fan in the first place, I really don’t like this trade at all. I wouldn’tmind seeing us trade love for a wing hopefully get wall in the draft and packaging the other two picks to get cole aldrich instead of love.
by mr.right on Jan 21, 2010 1:43 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs
See the post by the
ever-vigilant KLJ below, but Gasol is listed at 7’1". And I can’t find many/any good centers out there, much less one that would fit better with Al Jefferson. Can you name some?
by PoorDick on Jan 21, 2010 2:33 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs
Indigent Richard:
Are you David Kahn in disguise? I noticed your absence yesterday evening, especially during the chat with David session online. Hmmmm.
A most reasonable trade proposal in many respects. Many of us would be disappointed losing Love, to be sure. But bringing in Gasol and Gay would be complement some of the remaining roster and strengthen weak wing play.
We all know that art is not the truth, art is a lie that makes us realize the truth.--Picasso
by uncle rico on Jan 21, 2010 4:51 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs
Just for the record
I’d be more disappointed losing Jonny than Kevin. I know Flynn has a lot of things to improve upon, and Love’s probably the better player, but I not-so-secretly hope Rubio stays in Spain/gets traded so that Jonny can be our point guard of the future.
by TimAllen on Jan 21, 2010 6:04 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs
That's interesting.
I’m not saying you’re wrong, but is it based on Flynn’s play, or personality? Because frankly, I’d be much more disturbed over losing Love.
by PoorDick on Jan 21, 2010 9:32 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs
Love is definitely the better player right now
but I think Flynn has more potential to be a great player in the future. I see Love’s ceiling as a tiny bit below an All-Star. A nice player to have but no one who could change the outcome of a team all by himself. I think Flynn, given improvement in a lot of areas of course (I’m not suggesting he’s there yet), could be an All-Star caliber point guard in a couple of years.
Of course, if you ask me for stats to back any of this up, I won’t have any. It’s just my gut feeling.
by TimAllen on Jan 21, 2010 9:45 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs
Too early to tell, I think
Love has improved greatly and has some rather special skills—a set that not many other players possess. That said, I see his limits, too. He maximizes his abilities and has a good BB IQ. But certain physical limitations will always prevent him from being the kind of player that can take over games. Of course, that does not imply at all that Jonny is that player either. Personally, I would hate to see either go. But that is the premise of this thread.
We all know that art is not the truth, art is a lie that makes us realize the truth.--Picasso
by uncle rico on Jan 21, 2010 10:06 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs
Well, yeah, definitely too early to tell
I do laugh, though, when people write off Jonny Flynn after half a season. Like if he’s not Chris Paul by now then he’s destined to be a sub-par point guard for his entire career.
I’m actually fine staying put right now with our team and waiting until this summer to do things. Keep Love, keep Al, keep Flynn, keep Sessions. Maybe trade Rubio’s rights if we can get something pretty good for them. But no need to overreact.
by TimAllen on Jan 21, 2010 10:11 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs
"I would hate to see either go"
I’m guessing so would the marketing staff. As valuable as Al Jefferson’s contributions are to the team, and he seems to be a perfectly decent person off the court, he’s just not the kind of guy who makes people renew their season tickets. For a perennial contender—sure, he’d be a fan favorite like Tim Duncan is for the good people of San Antonio.
Whether real or practiced, Love’s got the whole media/public thing down pat. And Flynn’s size, drive, and explosiveness make him a natural, as well. But it is telling that the minute Rubio fell into the Wolves’ lap, his image was the first thing you saw on the team’s website. They desperately want and need someone who runs the floor, makes deft passes, dunks, blocks shots, or hits dramatic threes—and not just because it might help them win more games.
by PoorDick on Jan 21, 2010 11:03 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs
I hope the marketing staff is not making any personnel decisions
If anything, the FO should be reading CH. Still upset my question was not posted last night to Mr. Kahn.
We all know that art is not the truth, art is a lie that makes us realize the truth.--Picasso
by uncle rico on Jan 21, 2010 11:24 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs
Can a team with thousands of empty seats
at every game, and not much more viewers at home and even fewer listeners on the radio afford not to at least consider the intrisic appeal of certain players? I don’t think they get the first say-so, but I’m guessing it’s a factor in their decision.
As to your question for Kahn, I have it on good authority that the answer is “boxers.”
by PoorDick on Jan 22, 2010 12:00 AM CST up reply actions 0 recs
Good point
about empty seats. They are quite noticeable, even more so when viewed online using NBA League Pass instead of my normal feed through Albania on Justin.TV. But only winning is going to make Wolves’ tickets the hot item during the winter months. Gosh, saying something so patently obvious certainly will come off as condescending, which is not my intent here. But the marketing staff has had their shot already, and through no fault of their own, ticket sales do not appear so good. Another campaign, even with popular players on the roster, won’t get fans in the seats if the Wolves are winning only 21% of their games.
As to your reply to my lingering question, this only heightens my suspicion that you may be the Kahn man in disguise here. With such great analysis, Kahn would be well advised to peruse the postings on CH.
Finally, I must commend your subject heading for this post: we all found it most provocative, and impossible not to take up the challenge. I look forward to future postings, such as “are you man enough to consider this,” and “do you have the cajones to discuss [fill in favorite topic]”.
We all know that art is not the truth, art is a lie that makes us realize the truth.--Picasso
by uncle rico on Jan 22, 2010 1:37 AM CST up reply actions 0 recs
Thank you
I was going to go with, “Do you think this trade is a great idea, or are you a pedophile?” but I didn’t want to tempt anyone into asking, “Why can’t it be both?”
by PoorDick on Jan 22, 2010 7:59 AM CST up reply actions 0 recs
Based on a posting during the OKC game
the B part of your A/B formulation could also be “Do you look like Nenad Krstic?” Not endorsing that view, just remarking.
We all know that art is not the truth, art is a lie that makes us realize the truth.--Picasso
by uncle rico on Jan 22, 2010 10:28 AM CST up reply actions 0 recs
Remember that very little offense is set up for Love right now. If we had more "little plays" run out of the triangle for him, you'd see more scoring from him and that would change your attitude about his potential to be an allstar.
He’s only 21 years old, played only 25 minutes a game last year, and missed half of this season. He has much much room for growth.
by Kevin Love Jefferson on Jan 22, 2010 12:39 AM CST up reply actions 0 recs
Sure, I think it could happen that he sneaks into the All-Star game
not ruling that out. Maybe when Duncan and Dirk retire, Yao is gone and Amar’e is traded, the openings will be there to get him into the game. But I think it will be tougher for a guy like Love than a guy like Flynn.
by TimAllen on Jan 22, 2010 9:07 AM CST up reply actions 0 recs
Karl
Imagine Love with a Karl Malone J. That might heighten your ceiling a bit..
by Mac of the MIAC on Jan 22, 2010 9:11 AM CST up reply actions 0 recs
But unlike Malone
he’s not nearly as physically or athletically gifted.
by TimAllen on Jan 22, 2010 9:17 AM CST up reply actions 0 recs
I don’t know how “Athletic” Malone was, but his offseason training regimine sure toned that body of his. I agree that Love is not as physically strong as Malone, but I think Love is more athletic and with better conditioning could be a good comparable. But the odds of Love working out to the degree of a Karl Malone seems like a longshot.
by Ebomb on Jan 22, 2010 12:06 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs
I don't see how anyone can think
Love is more athletic than Karl Malone. Sorry, I just don’t buy that one.
by TimAllen on Jan 22, 2010 12:09 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs
Love is not close to Malones
when comparing how athletics they both are, but they both have about the same amount of BBIQ, which is gonna carry Love a long way, even to a couple of all-star games and hopefully to the podium to recieve the Larry O’Brien NBA Championship for the Minnesota Timberwolves
by AT-360 on Jan 22, 2010 7:47 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs
I disagree. Malone was never a great athlete, he was strong and had great conditioning but he is no better athlete than Kevin Love. Unforunately there is nothing to back up my claims or your’s as Malone didn’t work out for the combine.
by Ebomb on Jan 23, 2010 4:09 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs
He has that shot, he's just afraid to use it. Love needs to work with Jefferson on his pump fake.
The old “Don Nelson” keep moving it higher till its shot.
by Kevin Love Jefferson on Jan 22, 2010 2:28 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs
Love has the jumper... he has that shot. He's just afraid to have it blocked. He needs to go to the Al Jefferson/Don Nelson pump faking school
by Kevin Love Jefferson on Jan 22, 2010 2:46 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs
No he doesn't.
He’s got the Kevin Love jumper. It’s a bit of a downgrade.
by TimAllen on Jan 22, 2010 2:53 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs
Malone J
Love definetaly does not have Malone’s J. I can’t think of a single power forward in the modern era who does/did. But since we are talking about K Love improving his game, and we all agree that he’s not going to get 50% more athletic next year, I think a logical progression of his game is to start perfecting the 17-19 footer ala Malone. I think we’ve all seen the potential of his shot this year, and even at UCLA. We just never run plays for him. 2-3 years from now, I think Love has more confidence in his jump shot, and who knows, maybe he has a top tier 17 footer in that time frame. That’s how he gets to 22 pts per game. Not more put backs.
by Mac of the MIAC on Jan 22, 2010 3:53 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs
Flynn could improve
but I’m wondering what anyone grabs on to to conclude that he’s more likely to ascend to stardom than the other dozen PGs taken in the first round. Anything can happen, but why do you expect Flynn to be in the upper echelon amongst all the good young PGs in the league?
by dropstep on Jan 21, 2010 11:35 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs
Because David Kahn told me he was special...
nah, in all seriousness, I have nothing to grab onto to conclude that he’ll be a star more than anyone else. I like his attitude. I like his competitiveness. I think he’s shown flashes of being a pretty good player already and if he harnesses those talents, he’ll ascend.
by TimAllen on Jan 22, 2010 9:09 AM CST up reply actions 0 recs
I'm not convinced
that Gasol-Jefferson is a better frontcourt than Love-Jefferson. I don’t agree that Gasol is an ideal center to play next to Al as we would still be without a strong help defender and weakside shot blocker. I think we’d go from having a great fit offensively and bad fit defensively to a bad fit offensively and only an ok fit defensively.
It’s not a bad trade, just somewhat lateral I think.
by Bethke on Jan 21, 2010 12:30 PM CST reply actions 0 recs
If Rubio agreed to come over earlier
if the wolves do this trade, then I’d do it. Wolves would probably have to max out Gay and give up expirings in addition Love & Flynn.
The way the Grizzlies are playing, I’d guess they give Gay his money and try to keep improving with their core…of course it is the Grizzlies, so you never know…
by DR_JPK on Jan 21, 2010 12:54 PM CST reply actions 0 recs
I think I'd do this
Though I’m not as high on Gay as many are, his improvement is good to see. I think I’d do this. Gasol is better than you (or at least I) thought he was, and all of a sudden the Wolves have full sized front line with talent, a point guard that can hold the fort and Rubio still coming over, and assets remaining to add pieces.
by Eric in Madison on Jan 21, 2010 1:04 PM CST reply actions 0 recs
Though I will add this
The negative here is having to pay Gay this summer, which takes the cap room, whereas neither Flynn nor Love get new contracts this year. Actually, the whole deal is a negative from a contractual point of view, since both Gay and Gasol have to get paid before Love and Flynn.
Hmmm. Now that I think about that aspect of things, I’m a little less sure I’d do it.
by Eric in Madison on Jan 21, 2010 1:58 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs
Yep, it's another reason I'd hesitate
on endorsing it. But:
1. It also makes it slightly more attractive for a frugal organization like the Griz
2. The Wolves have AlJeff on the books for four more years, whereas the Griz only have ZBo on for two—so although Memphis is much better than Minnesota, they may have more motivation to stay with a younger roster.
by PoorDick on Jan 21, 2010 2:25 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs
It might be a fair trade
but I would be scared to death to trade Love and Flynn for a guy who can walk away this summer. Talk about setting the organization back a couple years.
by Rumblebee on Jan 21, 2010 10:51 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs
What about
Love straight up for Gasol?? Now a Gasol/AL front court.
by Rumblebee on Jan 21, 2010 10:52 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs
Nope.
The Flynn-to-Gay upgrade on the perimeter is what makes it worth it for me.
If they threw in a first-rounder, or maybe Thabeet, then I’d start thinking about that. Ehh.. but still probably not.
by LoveTo on Jan 21, 2010 11:04 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs
Do you think a Gasol/Jefferson front court
would be worse than a Love/Jefferson front court.
I will admit, I should have added something for the Wolves in the deal, just couldn’t think of what the Grizz have that the Wolves need, and not sure they really need more 1st rounders right now.
by Rumblebee on Jan 22, 2010 12:14 AM CST up reply actions 0 recs
I don't know about a Gasol/Jefferson vs. a Love/Jefferson..
The former might be more complementary. But in a vacuum, I think Love is the better player, and I don’t think we’re at the point yet where we should take a lesser talent for a better fit.
by LoveTo on Jan 22, 2010 2:02 AM CST up reply actions 0 recs
I would normally agree they shouldn't give up value for a better fit
But with all the extra assets the Wolves have, they could afford to if it made the team better (that’s ultimately what matters). That said, as you mention, I don’t know if it would make the team better. However, if Memphis really wanted Love and was willing to give up Gasol, it could be the start of a three or four team trade. Grizz get Love and move someone to another team, Wolves get Gasol to pair with AL, Wolves trade a minor asset to other team and in return get another good player, maybe not a starter, but a good, 20MPG backup for AL and Gasol. Front court set for eight years. Gasol gets to play with Rubio!
by Rumblebee on Jan 22, 2010 11:06 AM CST up reply actions 0 recs
Trade Kevin Love?
Yikes!
But I think I might just do that one…….
Free Alando!
by Auswolf on Jan 21, 2010 1:42 PM CST reply actions 0 recs
memphis has Gasol & Thabeet at Center and Randolph at PF. if they thought Thabeet could play center and didn't want to pay Gay, they are more likely to ask for Flynn and our 1st round pick.
They use our 1st round pick to take Turner or Johnson to replace Gay and they take Flynn with the assumption that he is an upgrade on conley – they could then trade Flynn or Conley depending on who played best.
We then end up with Gasol, Jefferson and Love. Gasol has 1.6 blocks per game. Jefferson when healthy last season had I.7 blocks per game.
By the way Gasol is 7’1".
That would be the type of front line that could compete for a championship – though in a few years it would be a very expensive front line and probably not work long term for that reason.
by Kevin Love Jefferson on Jan 21, 2010 2:22 PM CST reply actions 0 recs
Or maybe they take our first round pick, flynn and Pekovic .....
by Kevin Love Jefferson on Jan 21, 2010 2:26 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs
maybe just our "first round pick" to replace Gay, Pekovic as back up to Thabeet and we toss in Utah pick.
by Kevin Love Jefferson on Jan 21, 2010 2:48 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs
best option from memphis standpoint... filling their needs
1) they get our lotter pick – take Turner/Johnson to replace Gay
2) They take Pekovic as backup center to Thabeet
3) They take our Charlotte pick – to fill any holes in their roster.
[Note: they don’t need a PF – Love or a PG – Flynn.]
We end up with
C – Gasol/Jefferson
PF – Love/Jefferson
SF – Gay/Gomes
SG – Brewer/Flynn
PG – Rubio/Flynn/Sessions – at least one of which is “tradable”.
by Kevin Love Jefferson on Jan 21, 2010 2:57 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs
If we really needed another getter shooting SG - this is the type of team that attracts "older guys" who want a championship.
A Ray Allen if he doesn’t resign with Boston might sign for MLE…..or a situation like that……
by Kevin Love Jefferson on Jan 21, 2010 3:00 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs
Do it.
If we’re confident we can re-sign Gay, then there’s no reason not to pull the trigger. To most objective observers, Gasol is as good as Love (that’s probably not entirely true, but it’s not a steep downgrade). If we’re confident Rubio will come over, Flynn really is somewhat expendable.
It would be sad to see Love go. But…
Rubio/Sessions
Top5Pick/Ellington
Gay/Brewer
Jefferson/Mid1stRoundPick
Gasol/Mid1stRoundPick
That’s a good line-up.
by LoveTo on Jan 21, 2010 3:27 PM CST reply actions 0 recs
"If we're confident Rubio will come over"
which I don’t think some of us are…
by TimAllen on Jan 21, 2010 3:37 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs
Trading for Gay (if you’re giving up assets like Love) is fraught with danger. Now you’re committed yourself to matching any contract he’s offered this summer. This could be substantial if teams like NY or NJ are spurned by the big dogs and feel obligated to try and land someone. If we’re going to guarantee paying Rudy Gay a huge salary, why give up Al and Flynn to do that?
My first preference for improving this team is for Glen and POBO to break the bank and go after some veteran talent with big paychecks. That isn’t happening.</blockquote>
How do you know this? You’ve been touting this for awhile, but as far as I know this is just your theory. Am I wrong? Please provide a link to the info that says the Wolves will be hanging out $10 million below the cap as you’ve suggested previously.
You’ve also said previously that paying Al his money while we rebuild isn’t financially wise or in Taylor/Kahn’s plans. Why then should we commit ourselves to paying Rudy the same kind of money, or even more in addition to Al? This makes no sense.
The deal might balance our roster a little better, but it makes us worse financially as we trade cheap options on Love and Flynn for Rudy’s pending extension.
by Blond Ricky on Jan 21, 2010 3:44 PM CST reply actions 0 recs
you have to assume that Gay is offered a Max contract by someone - likely Knicks or Nets. So assuming you've decided to do this, you are overpaying him to keep him.
All cap flexibility is gone once this trade is done.
I like my version better. Keep Love and Jefferson and get Gasol. If it doesn’t produce a championship, you can always trade one of the three later. Very good to great big men are always in demand. Somebody will overpay to get a top big man.
by Kevin Love Jefferson on Jan 21, 2010 3:58 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs
I'm sorry.
I thought I made my thoughts clear enough for even the simplest of Wolves fans to understand. Obviously I have failed, and for that I apologize.
I want them to spend a ton of money raiding other teams for overpriced but talented players. That isn’t happening refers to the fact that:
a. It hasn’t nor is it currently occurring
b. Based on the talent and finances of the Wolves, I don’t think it will—at least, not any time soon
If you have a link you could provide that would show that they have indeed recently added talented players at great cost, please provide it, and I will retract this egregious and obviously incorrect statement.
In regard to paying Al while the Wolves rebuild, please direct your attention to the following quote from my original post:
The next favorite way to get better is to trade our oldest most expensive major asset (Al Jefferson) for several younger picks and prospects
.
My hope was that this sentence would demonstrate that I don’t want to commit to a large contract like the one Rudy Gay is expected (and expecting) to get, while paying Al. Again, I obviously wasn’t able to demonstrate this, at least not to every reader at every level of reading comprehension.
So, to repeat and reiterate and go over and over and over again and again, if the above proposed moves don’t come to fruition, then they need to figure out some way to improve the team, without spending a ton more money than they already are.
Thank you, though, for pointing out the dangerousness that this is fraughted with.
Twice.
by PoorDick on Jan 21, 2010 4:18 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs
Gosh, I guess I have a reading comprehension problem.
I thought for sure that you were proposing that we do this:
""The Wolves send Kevin Love (I know, I know) and Jonny Flynn to the Memphis Grizzlies for Marc Gasol and Rudy Gay.""
And then asking for opinions on whether we thought that was a good idea. My mistake. Next time I’l know that your trade proposals are things that you don’t really want to do.
by timmuggs on Jan 21, 2010 6:28 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs
Thank you!
Why is this so hard for others to understand . . .
by PoorDick on Jan 21, 2010 9:20 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs
Wow. If that's the way you want to play.
Based on the talent and finances of the Wolves, I don’t think it will—at least, not any time soon
I’m sorry to say that just because you’ve concluded that the Wolves won’t take on salary doesn’t mean it won’t happen. It make some sense to go that route, but I’ve never read or heard anyone with the Wolves suggest this. So…maybe you could add a clarifier next time? Just say it’s your opinion only and you have no inside knowledge of such a directive. That way the simpletons like myself won’t read your declarative statement to read like it’s a stated principle of Taylor and Kahn going forward.
As far dealing Al, I know that’s what you want, but that’s not what you posted. You wanted to deal Love and Flynn with a big part of the return value being a guy that is going to be a FA anyway. Gasol makes some sense, but to me dealing real value for Gay is not smart.
I don’t have enough time to provide the audio or print links to the NUMEROUS times that Kahn has referenced free agency and pointedly mentions taking on a salary with our cap space. The 16 month rebuild with 5 periods of activity has been well noted. No, we haven’t added salary recently (were you expecting them to with potential cap space looming?), but I’ll stick with Kahn talking about the options we have in free agency/trades as an indication that they’re planning to be active…vs. well..looking at the team from the outside and deciding what they’ll do.
My hope was that this sentence would demonstrate that I don’t want to commit to a large contract like the one Rudy Gay is expected (and expecting) to get, while paying Al. Again, I obviously wasn’t able to demonstrate this, at least not to every reader at every level of reading comprehension.
So you don’t want to commit to overpaying Gay while paying Al…but you want to trade Love and Flynn so we can overpay Gay while keeping Al? Great!
if the above proposed moves don’t come to fruition, then they need to figure out some way to improve the team, without spending a ton more money than they already are.
How does dealing two cheap guys for one you’re going to have to pay this summer make financial sense? Going off the trade you proposed in this thread, we’d be paying Al and likely Gay over $10 million a year. And, how much better does it actually make us? We just traded our last two #1 picks for older guys and given up our cap space? We’re going to near the cap after paying Gay (which you’ve said before we wouldn’t do) so we’d be locked into that team pretty well financially. If we really want Gasol, why not try to deal Love for him straight up or with filler and then massively overpay Gay this summer? Or get Gasol and make a play for Butler, Deng, Iguodala, etc?
All along I’ve never expected the Wolves to make some massive salary plunge. I’ve maintained that the Wolves could clear enough cap room to take on a big ticket player and still stay at the cap. That’s less payroll than most teams are at right now. For example, Marc Stein is now reporting that Iguodala may now be available without taking Dalembert and/or Brand. If we dealt expirings and some smaller assets like the Charlotte first (maybe adding Gomes non guarateed deal for Willie Green’s one year), we could put together as good a package as teams like Dallas and Houston who would be mostly offering cap relief and smaller assets. Iggy is a big ticket guy, but Gay would be too in your scenario. I’d rather have Iggy, Love and Flynn than Gay and Gasol.
by Blond Ricky on Jan 21, 2010 8:30 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs
"If that's the way you want to play"
Really? There was no snarkasm in this quote?
Please provide a link to the info that says the Wolves will be hanging out $10 million below the cap as you’ve suggested previously
I really do hope Kahn spends lots of money to bring players in. But there isn’t a single action taken that would lead me to believe that he will, or that good players want to come to play in Minnesota (if they have the choice). Kahn’s words are just that—words. Assume for a minute that the Wolves are trying to cut costs first, and get wins second. Do you really think that he would say that publicly? Of course not. So why would you take him at his word, even though so far he hasn’t done a single thing that would lead you to believe he can/will add a Grade A player to this roster at a huge expense?
by PoorDick on Jan 21, 2010 9:19 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs
To be fair
he really hasn’t had many opportunities to add a Grade A player to this roster nor did he have the cap space to do so. I don’t think we can make any kind of conclusion on this until the summer, when there are Grade A players available and we have enough money to do something about it.
by TimAllen on Jan 21, 2010 9:43 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs
Too true.
There wasn’t a single thing he’s said or done that’s gone against his professed intentions to improve the team by the beginning of next season. The only strike against him in that regard is that so far draft picks are run-of-the-mill, the FAs are nothing special, and neither additions (nor the new coach) have improved the team. So far.
But I still will be pleasantly surprised if he has the money and skill to quickly improve this team by the beginning of next season. It’s strange, but if that’s the case, then I feel that the safest and most likely route is to throw a bunch of lottery picks at the wall to see what sticks. If the fans and revenue follow, then they will be more likely to add a higher-priced veteran or two. Just my opinion . . .
by PoorDick on Jan 21, 2010 10:34 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs
Sorry if I was snarky, but I was trying to prove a point. You have no evidence that your theory is correct yet seem to pass it off as fact.
As far as our inaction in bringing in a big salary: Kahn talked of 5 periods of actiivity last year and he took advantage of the first 2 with the draft and FA…we were pretty active. We’ve already made a minor deal this season. I think that TimAllen is correct below. If Iguodala gets moved for cap space and we could have made a better deal then yes…I’d take that as a sign that we’re not interested in salary.
So why would you take him at his word, even though so far he hasn’t done a single thing that would lead you to believe he can/will add a Grade A player to this roster at a huge expense?
Why take it at his word? Because it would be utterly foolish for a team struggling to keep/attract fans to repeatedly talk about something that they have no intention of attempting. His words are no guarantee, but surely there are much better ways of playing it than to repeatedly address the issue the way he has.
by Blond Ricky on Jan 21, 2010 10:43 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs
I'm not sure he has a choice
other than to say, “be patient, we’re going to get better.” I think they will do SOMEthing, but even if he wants to add a player, one has to become available.
I don’t envy the guy. His job actually would have been easier if Rubio would have been picked before the fifth slot. Then he would have likely grabbed Flynn and maybe Curry, and the team would be, like, four wins ahead of where there at, but nobody would have rained down the crapstorm like they did when he picked Rubio, but couldn’t get the kid over right away.
We’ll see. Hopefully John Wall will fall into their figurative laps, and some excitement will come back to the team.
by PoorDick on Jan 21, 2010 11:55 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs
Don't think Rambis would have taken this job, if he didn't think he could be a championship caliber team. There must have been a commitment to "spend" to bring in Rambis, Lambier and Theus. Thats my opinion at least.
And remember we were spending $75 million, five plus years ago. This owner did that.
by Kevin Love Jefferson on Jan 22, 2010 12:46 AM CST up reply actions 0 recs
That's actually a very good point.
If Kahn’s lying to us, then he must have lied to Rambis, too.
by LoveTo on Jan 22, 2010 2:03 AM CST up reply actions 0 recs
I just reread your post:
That isn’t happening refers to the fact that:
a. It hasn’t nor is it currently occurring
b. Based on the talent and finances of the Wolves, I don’t think it will—at least, not any time soon
That isn’t happening refers to the fact that…I don’t think it will…
Well..maybe it is happening because of the fact that I think it will.
by Blond Ricky on Jan 21, 2010 8:38 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs
Trading for Gay (if you’re giving up assets like Love) is fraught with danger. Now you’re committed yourself to matching any contract he’s offered this summer. This could be substantial if teams like NY or NJ are spurned by the big dogs and feel obligated to try and land someone. If we’re going to guarantee paying Rudy Gay a huge salary, why give up Al and Flynn to do that?
My first preference for improving this team is for Glen and POBO to break the bank and go after some veteran talent with big paychecks. That isn’t happening.
How do you know this? You’ve been touting this for awhile, but as far as I know this is just your theory. Am I wrong? Please provide a link to the info that says the Wolves will be hanging out $10 million below the cap as you’ve suggested previously.
You’ve also said previously that paying Al his money while we rebuild isn’t financially wise or in Taylor/Kahn’s plans. Why then should we commit ourselves to paying Rudy the same kind of money, or even more in addition to Al? This makes no sense.
The deal might balance our roster a little better, but it makes us worse financially as we trade cheap options on Love and Flynn for Rudy’s pending extension.
by Blond Ricky on Jan 21, 2010 3:45 PM CST reply actions 0 recs
Oops
I meant why give up Love and Flynn for Gay when he’s an RFA.
Further, I think owning his RFA rights would be nice, but hardly worth trading Love and Flynn. Sure, we get Gasol, but why not make that the focus of the deal and leave Gay out?
by Blond Ricky on Jan 21, 2010 3:54 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs
Rudy Gay
Unless we can do a sign and trade I wouldn’t do it because he’d probally walk at the end of this year anyways and then what. I think Gasol might be a better fit then Love but its not worth it if Gay walks at the end of the year and we get nobody. We can probally sign him at then end of the season anyways and not have to give up anything. There will be better Center options then Pau’ s little brother down the road anyways.
by waldo11teen on Jan 21, 2010 3:56 PM CST reply actions 0 recs
You're definitely right about the extension
as it wouldn’t make sense without it.
But who are the better Center options? David Thorpe recently ranked him the best “Big” of the sophomore class:
Gasol has been a rock for Memphis all season long. He is averaging almost 15 points and 10 rebounds a game. Bigs who require double-teams on offense but don’t normally need help defending the post are a coach’s dream. Gasol fits that bill.
by PoorDick on Jan 21, 2010 4:50 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs
I'd rather sign Haywood this offseason
but if that doesn’t, this isn’t unfair for either team. Obviously we both give up pieces. We have slightly higher risk going in, but also slightly higher reward (I think… unless Flynn and Love really aren’t anywhere near their ceilings). I like Gasol going forward, as we don’t seem to have another true center in mind, realistically. As has been said by a few already, I’d be neutral on this deal going down… which probably means it’s a good deal.
by Mplax on Jan 21, 2010 6:01 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs
I would doubt Flynn is near his ceiling
given that he’s played half a season. Love may be close but I still think he has a ways to go.
by TimAllen on Jan 21, 2010 6:05 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs
No you're right
I should have added an extra little bit in there about how close they are to their ceilings compared to Gasol and Gay. Both of whom shouldn’t be close to theirs either, in terms of age at least.
by Mplax on Jan 21, 2010 11:10 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs
If Gasol is so good...
why would Memphis give him up? I think they’re much more likely to deal Thabeet.
by Blond Ricky on Jan 21, 2010 8:32 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs
You're right.
But they wouldn’t be “giving up” on Gasol—they would be getting Love in return. I feel that the trade is really Gasol for Love, and Gay for Flynn. Memphis only trades Gay if they didn’t plan on signing him for what he could get elsewhere, and figures that they might as well get something back for him. The Wolves would only take Gay if they were confident they could re-up him for a reasonable price.
Plus, I believe Thabeet is the owner’s pick, and likely to get more chance to succeed/fail than another random player. Especially with how well Evans has played—you could make a case that an Evans/Mayo backcourt wouldn’t have worked anyway, but I’m guessing if Heisley had it to do over again, today he would take Evans with the second pick.
by PoorDick on Jan 21, 2010 9:28 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs
I think MEM says no
Thabeet is not going to be ready for 36 MPG for a long time (ever)? They probably don’t want two ground-bound PFs manning their front-court any more than we do.
"It's tough to make predictions, especially about the future." -- Yogi Berra
by Wile E Coyote on Jan 21, 2010 6:27 PM CST reply actions 0 recs
But do we want
two ground-bound, slow centers who both like to set up in the left block as our frontcourt? I’m not sure why either team wants this outcome.
by dropstep on Jan 21, 2010 7:43 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs
HMMM
You probably figured I hate this trade since it involves Rudy Gay and Kevin Love
Although:
1. Marc Gasol has actually improved a good deal as a defender due to his weight loss. He’s also capable of playing with Al since he’s capable being effective in the High Post. He is longer than Love.
2. Rudy Gay has much more long-term upside than Jonny Flynn.
I’d probably say no. I just think Love’s got more potential room to grow to Marc Gasol. I’m also doubtful whether Rudy Gay would resign.
by Jose Cordoba on Jan 21, 2010 10:27 PM CST reply actions 0 recs
I hear you
No way do they do this deal if Gay isn’t a lock to resign. I wouldn’t like the deal if it’s just Gasol for Love, and barring any influence that trade may have on bringing Rubio over sooner and happier, I don’t think either team would make the trade.
by PoorDick on Jan 21, 2010 10:38 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs
This is a great question
I’ve been wanting to get Gasol since they drafted Thabeet. On the other hand, we’d have to worry about Al’s health even more. Gay would have to be certain to resign, and he would help, but I still can’t shake the feeling that he’ll never be special. Yet he’s so talented. But, again, Al’s health.
I think I’d let somebody else make the decision while I go home, turn my phone off and pour some whiskey.
by museum on Jan 21, 2010 11:59 PM CST reply actions 0 recs
One other point
The way Memphis is going, I doubt they do a major shakeup like this.
by museum on Jan 22, 2010 12:00 AM CST reply actions 0 recs
Right
Although, it will be interesting to see what happens in a year when ZBo is like, 31, making umpteen million a year, playing relatively well for an up-and-coming team, and expecting a new max contract to take him into retirement. Unless they have plans to have a Water Buffalo and Giraffe front court of Gasol and Thabeet, the Grizz are going to be back again looking for a PF.
by PoorDick on Jan 22, 2010 12:03 AM CST up reply actions 0 recs
I agree it might be smart of them long term, but I imagine they’re probably gaining a lot of positive vibes down there, and that’s a tenuous market situation they’re in down there. I still can’t believe they moved there. But I bet they’re more than happy to let the good times roll for now.
Also, R.I.P. Jay Reatard. Memphis’ finest.
by museum on Jan 22, 2010 12:08 AM CST up reply actions 0 recs
Too many "there"s in that post
I hate writing tired. I go to bed now, night night.
by museum on Jan 22, 2010 12:10 AM CST up reply actions 0 recs
I rather just trade Jonny Flynn for Rudy Gay straight up. I think Gay with this staff could turn in to that #1 we desperately need. If that were the case, then our salary cap room would be gone and it would behoove Kahn to move the expirings in a deal to get more talent. Maybe Andre Igoudala and Dalembert?
C Dalembert/Jefferson
PF Jefferson/Love
SF Gay/Brewer
SG Igoudala/Ellington
PG Sessions/?
by Jaughn on Jan 22, 2010 1:16 AM CST reply actions 0 recs
76ers you mention
might be easily had if/when Stefanski goes into firesale mode.
We all know that art is not the truth, art is a lie that makes us realize the truth.--Picasso
by uncle rico on Jan 22, 2010 1:40 AM CST up reply actions 0 recs
Yes
I’d do this trade in a second. I think the Wolves win 10 more games with Gay and Gasol as opposed to Love and Flynn.
by Mac of the MIAC on Jan 22, 2010 9:13 AM CST reply actions 0 recs
Step back for a second...your reasoning for Memphis doing this deal are weak
Memphis would be trading a Starting 3 (Gay) and 5(Gasol) for a backup 4 (Love) and backup 1 (Flynn). You admitted that Love is the fallback for Randolph asking too much in two years, but Love would also be up for an extension, and Flynn is only a “fallback” for Conley.
Fear or no fear on resigning Gay, if I were memphis I would take that chance (because I could control it) 10 times out of 10 than to trade 2 starters for 2 (although good) backups.
We can get mired in how talent is equal, but if they can’t fully utilize it (e.g. they aren’t starting), then how does it pay off? If they do the trade OR lose Gay, they still have a hole at the 3.
by Cedarpenguin on Jan 22, 2010 10:11 AM CST reply actions 0 recs
Well, I assume in this scenario
that Love is not a backup—going forward he and Randolph would start up front.
Actually, I’ve almost convinced myself I wouldn’t do this for the Wolves. You can look at the trade this way:
3 years of Love (or 2 plus matching rights) and 4 years of Flynn (or 3 plus matching rights) for matching rights to Gay and 1 year of Gasol (plus Bird rights).
by Eric in Madison on Jan 22, 2010 10:49 AM CST up reply actions 0 recs
I am afraid to make this trade.
For one, I’ll reference this quote from Britt Robson in his recently posted midseason grades
Memphis can’t stop anybody (25th in defensive efficiency and last in points in the paint allowed)
While Gasol has the body to be a center, with much better perimeter defenders on his team (Gay, Mayo), along with a 3rd big that we envision ideal next to Love and Al (Thabeet) Memphis is still Last in point in the paint allowed. This is troubling to me. Love’s offensive skill set and overall skill set at 21 versus Gasol at 25 is still much more valuable IMO.
I don’t think I would even advocate trading Flynn for Gay unless it’s this offseason and we are signing gay long term and he wants to be here. Why give up assets now that place us in a situation of uncertainty this summer.
by Ebomb on Jan 22, 2010 12:13 PM CST reply actions 0 recs
Exactly
I haven’t seen any convincing arguments here for how a Gasol Jefferson frontcourt is an upgrade. Jefferson’s defense is more exposed at the 4. Both players like to play in the left block. Gasol is slow himself, not a great defensive presence despite the height, and not as good a rebounder as Love. Yes, the Wolves would no longer be undersized in the front court, but better?
And that’s before diving into the financial and contractual implications.
by dropstep on Jan 22, 2010 12:31 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs
If you look at "NET EFFICIENCY" [offense minus defense] for the memphis front court they are 9th in the NBA at plus 6.4
So people score on them, but they score EVEN MORE on the opposition.
by Kevin Love Jefferson on Jan 22, 2010 2:41 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs
Your still not convincing me that Gasol would be a DEFENSIVE upgrade. Love and Jefferson can do offense pretty well, why switch Love out for Gasol if it isn’t going to make us better defensively. That seems like just spinning wheels and we’d have Gasol and Jefferson and we’d talk about which one has to go in order to find a defensive big man.
by Ebomb on Jan 22, 2010 4:38 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs
PoorDick
Very thought provoking post. Thanks.
by DR_JPK on Jan 22, 2010 12:28 PM CST reply actions 0 recs
Just diddling around
until the trade deadline, but I appreciate your thoughts.
by PoorDick on Jan 22, 2010 1:39 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs
I tried to Get Memphis' take on this trade
I posted a poll on their SB site and after 21 hours there are 5 responses – 2 of which are mine. But there is one comment, and I think it’s pretty good:
“That the Grizzlies feel like PG and PF are positions they need to address. Mike Conley and Johnny Flynn can’t play together, so even though I love Johnny, the Grizzlies would have to make another trade to maximize the value of their team assets.
Also, if Kevin Love and Al Jefferson can’t play defense together, what would make anyone think that Kevin Love and Zach Randolph could play defense together.
I mean, the values aren’t bad, you’d probably just need to swap picks with us to get it equal in that regard, but those are not pieces Memphis needs. Plus I would say there is less than a 10% chance that this roster gets blown up with the Grizzlies playing well."
by gill0137 on Jan 22, 2010 1:04 PM CST reply actions 0 recs
Thank you
I meant to do that, but unimportant stuff like work and family keep interrupting things like posting and commenting on hypothetical trade proposals that probably wouldn’t make much difference if they were to occur, not that they will ever happen.
But don’t worry! Based on my devotion to this and other topics regarding the Wolves, it appears work and family are gradually disappearing, so soon I’ll be able to give 100% to the site.
by PoorDick on Jan 22, 2010 1:38 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs
Perhaps you could have a regular post...something like the DailyDick??
That aside, came here looking for you. Just saw a Kahn quote you might find interesting. It is on some Channel 9 blog written by Doogie (Darren Wolfson).
He asked Kahn if he still considers Jefferson to be a #2 and Love a #4 on a contending team. Kahn’s reply was fairly direct, something like “Basically YES”, then Kahn mentioned Love got a late start on the season.
I was surprised he didn’t make an effort to hedge on Love and say he could be higher. Considering your recent trade Jefferson posts, I thought you might find this interesting, and perhaps for you a bit depressing.
by Rumblebee on Jan 22, 2010 1:53 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs
I like the alliteration of
“Daily Dick”. But I imagine anyone googling that term would be forwarded to some rather untoward adult sites. But “Quotidian Indigent Richard” just sounds way to pompous for a sports blog.
We all know that art is not the truth, art is a lie that makes us realize the truth.--Picasso
by uncle rico on Jan 22, 2010 2:34 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs
D'oh!
since Google is obviously a two-way street, such a moniker could also bring some unexpected traffic this way as well. But do we want such visitors in the CH neighborhood?
We all know that art is not the truth, art is a lie that makes us realize the truth.--Picasso
by uncle rico on Jan 22, 2010 2:37 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs
Who doesn't like their Dick
delivered in Daily Doses? No matter how “indigent” it might be.
Kahn’s public comments mean very little to me, as if I were his boss, I would expect him to obfuscate and camoflauge every intention for as long as possible.
But if the sentiment is genuine, then I like it, as I think it shows he knows just how untalented this team is, and how much drastic work needs to be done. Whether he can or will is an entirely different matter.
And to rererereiterate: I DON’T DISLIKE AL JEFFERSON. In fact, other than Love, Jefferson’s the prize asset on this team, as far as I see it. And Love’s greater value (to the Wolves) is due more to age/upside/salary, vs. any great talent difference.
I hope when Kahn adds Joe Johnson and Rudy Gay and Spencer Haywood and Heywood Jablome to the roster this summer, everybody here gets to say “HEY POOR DICK YOU DUMBASS I THOUGHT KAHN WASN’T GOING TO SPEND ANY MONEY OMG WHATANIDIOT” It will be one of the happiest days of my Wolves fandom.
by PoorDick on Jan 22, 2010 3:21 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs
PD
Didn’t mean to imply you don’t like Jefferson. Just meant that your theory is trading AL for three $4mil players doesn’t sound like something Kahn would do, mainly because he apparently still thinks Love is 2 rungs below AL.
BTW, it’s not Joe Johnson and Rudy Gay….think big man! LeBron and Bosh!
by Rumblebee on Jan 22, 2010 5:24 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs
You're right
and I like your attitude. I’m tired of my little wishes not coming true. It’s time to make BIG dreams that can get DESTROYED!!!!
Al’s getting paid three times what KLove gets—that’s why I think Jefferson goes before Love (and I think pride goes before a fall).
by PoorDick on Jan 22, 2010 6:16 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs
I laughed
and then started to hope I was supposed to laugh and that you weren’t serious about this…
by Mplax on Jan 22, 2010 3:50 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs
Plus, whenever I get poor reviews at work or home,
I bring in Kevin Love Jefferson, and he uses statistical analysis to prove that I DON"T HAVE GOOD COWORKERS RO FAMILY MEMBVERS AROUND ME1
Thank you, KLJ—-
by PoorDick on Jan 22, 2010 6:19 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs
How 'bout some substitutions?
Switch K-Love for Big Al, and switch Jonny Flynn for Ramon sessions, and it would still work out, except for the salary thing
by AT-360 on Jan 22, 2010 7:41 PM CST reply actions 0 recs
Better FA this summer
We have been aquiuring expiring contracts and cap space the last few yaers so we could make a major move this summer. I hope it is better than Gay and Gasol in a scenario where we also give up Flynn and Love. If that is what we have been sacrifciing for these last few years, then it sucks big time!
by scottysnowski on Jan 22, 2010 11:37 PM CST reply actions 0 recs
I can't see Memphis making this trade
If they could pick up a few quality bench veterans in the next couple months I think they could push for a 4th or 5th seed, and maybe even a 3rd seed because Dallas and San Antonio should start showing age this year. They have guys at every position, two players who can score in the paint, decent interior defense, two athletic and smart perimeter players that can make their own shot and shoot from outside, and decent point guards. Memphis is going to be that team this year that no one wants to play if Memphis can make the playoffs.
I can’t see Memphis making any trades this year other than picking up cheap assets for a playoff run.
by Mike B. on Jan 23, 2010 7:41 PM CST reply actions 0 recs
Gasol for J-Flynn is probably in our favour (Gasol being > Flynn) BUT I just like Love too much to trade him for Gay. I think what Gay brings can be had more easily, Kevin is more “special”. Don’t forget how young he is!
Official Kahn/Rambis band-wagon rider since 2009
by Wim (Belgium) on Jan 27, 2010 2:58 PM CST reply actions 0 recs
Comments For This Post Are Closed
Secondary Sidebar
Related FanPosts on Canis Hoopus
FanPosts
Community blog posts and discussion.
Certain photos copyright © 2010 by Associated Press or Getty Images. Any commercial use or distribution without the express written consent of Associated Press and Getty Images is strictly prohibited.
