Tyrus Thomas?
by PoorDick on Feb 15, 2010 7:27 AM CST
Email
PrintYour good friend and mine AWoj at Yahoo Sports is at it again, calling the Wolves a "sleeper" trade destination for Bulls forward Tyrus Thomas.
If it makes you feel any better or worse about the idea, Wojnaroski says:
Several league executives suggested the Minnesota Timberwolves could be a sleeper for him. Minnesota general manager David Kahn has been researching Thomas and has plenty of assets – three 2010 first-round picks, multiple second-rounders and a host of expiring contracts – to make it happen. Once the Timberwolves trade Al Jefferson(notes) this summer, they can re-sign Thomas and plug him into the frontline with Kevin Love(notes). Jefferson is expected to be traded for a talented, young small forward.
Trading for Thomas would be a way to get a long, athletic power forward with upside, and the Timberwolves could easily re-sign him this summer.
So Love plays, what, center? Or does Thomas play the three? Or is a trade for DHoward the second shoe to drop?
I'm not averse to Trying Tyrus for a few weeks, nor even considering re-signing him for a little less than he thinks he's worth this summer. I'm not even against moving Al for younger players. But trading him so that Love and Thomas can play together sans any center other than Hollins doesn't make any sense.
64 comments
|
0 recs |
Do you like this story?
Comments
It doesn't make sense...
..At least what the writer is stating. But it does make sense if we want to trade expirings for expirings and not hurt our cap number. I am just wondering whether it makes sense to chip in a 1st rounder for the pleasure of seeing if he would work out here or not. Seems odd. Maybe the throw in Johnson too?
I like what Tyrus
brings to the table. Exactly what we would need. However there is no way you can have a line up with both he and Love as starters. No chance. Neither is a 3 or a 5. I can however see him starting next to Al, with Al at center. I still think Love and Brewer are top notch reserves who would log heavy minutes on a good team. I think we may end up regretting dealing Al. He is the one guy who we can go to in situations where you flat out need a score. You need 2 of those guys on your team. We’d be down to zero if we got rid of him. I’m probably in the minority but I’d much rather trade Love than Al.
I suppose the idea is that Thomas would spend some time at center
which is…dubious. They would still need another big, and it would have to be a real center. Thomas would provide some of the athleticism currently lacking, though.
Eh. Not particularly enticing, really. Hard to say unless we know how much it would cost to extend him. I wouldn’t want to spend a lot on him
by Eric in Madison on Feb 15, 2010 8:39 AM CST reply actions
A Few Points...
1) Wojecahsdfusgu is the same guy that “broke” the Granger for Al rumor, and he’s stood by his source ever since. It makes sense that he firmly believes Al is going to be traded in the off-season.
2) Even though Thomas is “expiring” he’ll still have a cap hold this summer if Chicago extends a qualifying offer, so if Chicago wants to sign a max-level free agent it will make sense for them to get rid of him for a regular old expiring.
3) If we get Thomas and extend a qualifying offer, who is going to try to outbid us for him? It really would make sense to give up the Utah or even Charlotte pick for a chance at him. Even though he’s most likely a head-case, he has been pretty productive every year in the league. Wins Produced/48 in 06/07: .108, WP/48 in 07/08: .091, WP/48 in 08/09: .120, WP/48 in 09/10: .148. I’ll take that over Hollins’ -.148 any day.
My prediction for the final trade: Cardinal, Jawai, and Bobcats pick for Thomas and Pargo. I’d do it, but I hope to be pleasantly surprised when we use the Jazz pick instead.
Nicely done.
My fears and hopes are intertwined on dealing with Chicago. I’d do the trade you suggested, but my concern is that Kahn and the Bulls will start talking about adding Love or AlJeff in exchange for putting Deng in the deal. Noah and Deng, I’m okay with. Deng and anybody else for one of the Wolves’ two best players is not something for which I will stand.
If Kahn thought
Martin’s deal was bad…how could he think any less than that about Deng’s?
by TheEvilProfessor on Feb 15, 2010 9:21 AM CST up reply actions
Yeah, Deng is exactly that guy who seems worse than he is because of his contract
He really isn’t a bad player; he does some things for you, and certain aspects of his game seem to be improving. And this is still his age 24 season. But man, that contract…
…and he went to Duke
by Eric in Madison on Feb 15, 2010 9:39 AM CST up reply actions
Deng's contract
After this year, Deng’s contract will have 4 years at about $51 million left on it. How much do we think it would cost us to try to sign Rudy Gay this offseason? If it would cost considerably more to sign Gay, maybe Deng’s contract wouldn’t be so bad.
How much would we have to offer Gay?
point is
if Kahn doesn’t like Martins contract, that pretty much rules them all out except for possible Gay if he signs a decent deal…which Mem would probably match anyways.
by TheEvilProfessor on Feb 15, 2010 1:38 PM CST up reply actions
I don't think Martin or Deng's contract
Will be viewed as negatively if we exchanged Al’s contract in the process. I think we are going to see where we draft. If we land Wall or Turner, I think we will try to use other assets to get another wing or go with we have. If we are instead in a position of drafting the best big on the board, then I think the logic will be to trade Jefferson’s contract for a SF contract.
"Once the Timberwolves trade Al Jefferson this summer..."
Apparently, this is a given.
If Jefferson doesn’t get traded, Woj will look pretty stupid to Wolves fans.
That being said...
It says a lot that he continues to be so forceful in his prediction. David Kahn is so specific in his denunciations of that Granger/Al rumor, you wonder if he’s hanging onto technicalities.
Kahn says…
"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."
But instead of mentioning names, he probably said “I’d be willing to give up a star big of ours for a that great swingman of yours with a similar contract”.
So Kahn’s able to say “Al’s name was never brought up” without lying, while Wojeasodfgusg can say “Kahn offered Al for Granger”
Two hilarious concepts held by many sports fans:
1. The team’s coach/management is always forthright and truthful in making comments to media.
2. The owner can and should spend an unlimited amount of money in an effort to win more games.
Woj is dumb
I think he’s doing what every good (meaning profitable to their company) journalist, or rather columnist (facts? What are facts?) does – he’s stirring up the pot and generating large amounts of traffic for Yahoo! because of this. Here’s another prediction for you: no matter what happens next summer with Al – Woj, as a sports columnist, will outlast Kahn as a GM. One has to be held accountable, and the other has to gain reader’s eyes.
"Come on Eddie, let's get serious."
by biggity2bit on Feb 15, 2010 11:00 AM CST up reply actions
Woj has been way better "sourced" than many of his peers
The guy is no Sam Smith. He’s not out there banging the drum for his pet trades; he’s actually got real league sources. Now, the motives of those sources is another matter….
"It has come to the editor’s attention that the Herald-Leader neglected to cover the civil rights movement. We regret the omission."
James Johnson
Darren Wolfson brought up a good point about holding out for James Johnson as well, considering David Kahn claimed he was a “top five talent”. How bout this deal..
James Johnson and Tyrus Thomas for Gomes, Wilkens, and the Charlotte pick.
I wouldn’t be opposed to that deal either.
too big of a hit to their
cap space. Maybe if you took back Heinrich then they waive gomes and end up with a little more cap space than they currently have.
by TheEvilProfessor on Feb 15, 2010 10:39 AM CST up reply actions
How's it to big of a hit?
They actually save more cap space by getting rid of Johnson, and they’re able to buy out Gomes in the off season.
Gomes will still count
as at least 1 mil and Sessions will be at 4 mil. Was johnson really going to make 5 mil next year?
by TheEvilProfessor on Feb 15, 2010 11:56 AM CST up reply actions
I guess I'm not sure how it works
i know the buy out for Gomes is 1 mil, but I always assumed that did not actually count against the cap. I also didn’t mention including Sessions, as I agree that woulnd’t make sense for chicago.
breakdown
Johnson next year is 1.7M cap hit.
If they get gomes and sessions and buyout gomes:
Gomes: 1M (he will be 1m in both 10-11 and 11-12, plus around 200K in 12-13)
Would mean decreasing their cap space by 0.7M and getting a pick. I would argue that they may be better off trying to get the wolves to take heinrich and taking back sessions instead of the pick. Heinrich can actually play a little SG…considering he can actually shoot.
by TheEvilProfessor on Feb 15, 2010 1:15 PM CST up reply actions
Kahn's said stuff about Hinrich that was similar to what he said about Kevin Martin
Late last year Cap’n Kirk was among our possible trade subjects. Once Kahn took over he nixed that based on Kirk’s contract.
"It has come to the editor’s attention that the Herald-Leader neglected to cover the civil rights movement. We regret the omission."
I still don't get the James Johnson love that Kahn allegedly had/has
Why try to land James Johnson when we can draft Damion James with one of our later picks? Not that I’m a huge Damion James fan, but he brings a similar physical profile to the table, yet plays with a lot more tenacity in terms of rebounding. We could use an athletic combo forward to replace Ryan Gomes and there are plenty available up and down the 2010 draft board.
by Rascal Flatts on Feb 15, 2010 12:04 PM CST up reply actions
Kahn's comment about Johnson being a "Top Five Talent"
Will be kind of like one of those disappointing drunken college hook-ups. It doesn’t matter how many 7-10’s he hooks up with in the future, we’ll always remember the 2 he stumbled back to the dorm with Freshman year.
There are beer goggles
and then there is actually acting upon one’s desires while wearing said goggles…..So where does Jonny Flynn fit into this analogy? Was Kahn stone-cold sober, slightly buzzed, or completely obliterated?
by Rascal Flatts on Feb 15, 2010 1:56 PM CST up reply actions
Oh wow, great question...
If saying “James Johnson is a Top Five Talent” is the equivalent of seeing a friend hook up with a 2…
Then the drafting/celebrating/continual starting of Jonny Flynn is the equivalent of your friend having a terrible girlfriend that he’ll never break up with. We all know the dude (Kahn) has made an awful choice (Flynn). She constantly tries to get into political debates, demands that we watch crappy movies, belittles fantasy football, and is slightly below homely in the looks department. Yet no one (Rambis, Taylor, Hoiberg) can say anything because the guy won’t stop talking about how great his girlfriend is. So instead, we sit in silence and continue to watch Maid in Manhattan, while they make out on the couch right next to us.
Flynn's not an awful choice.
He’s not optimal, but it’s not like he’s completely useless. There have been plenty of bigger busts at the 6th pick than him. He’s not even a bust! He’s just not necessarily any better than several guys picked after him.
He’s more like a girl with a rockin’ bod but one glaring flaw, like a lazy eye.
by princelyfrank on Feb 15, 2010 2:40 PM CST up reply actions
LOL
Lazy Eye isn’t bad enough.
Let’s compromise.
How bout we say she has huge boobs, but the issue is that she’s got a third Total Recall boob. So while we’re a fan of his left boob (speed/quickness) and his right boob (charisma/willingness to live in snowy environment) it’s that middle boob (over dribbling/un-facilitating-ness) that has thrown us for a loop.
For those who haven’t seen Total Recall, here is a censored link to the three boobed woman…
Cosmetic surgery could fix that...
…no problem.
But would we want to? Too much of a good thing can be excellent.
Dribbling too much is a classic young PG problem
If every 20-year-old woman had that third, uh, feature, your analogy would work better. The fact is that a huge, huge share of point guards experience this sort of problem early on, and lots of them figure it out. Most of them do, to some extent.
It’s not like this is a baseball player who can’t keep from taking “aggressive” swings at pitches early in the count. (Hello, Twins management?) That’s almost more a temperamental thing; you don’t see that change much at all once someone’s made the majors. Point guards often go through exactly the sort of learning process Flynn’s seeing now, and many of them figure it out over time.
The right analogy might be something like a girl having braces — but then, I think this “bad girlfriend” idea is worthy of someone who’d be into something as absolutely lame as “fantasy” football anyway…. If you’d made this analogy about a loser boyfriend, that would probably have shown up on the list of awful traits.
"It has come to the editor’s attention that the Herald-Leader neglected to cover the civil rights movement. We regret the omission."
Try asking a woman
if you know any. Ba-dum bum.
If most women were making up a list of “awful boyfriend stuff,” fantasy football would be “deal-breaker” level.
"It has come to the editor’s attention that the Herald-Leader neglected to cover the civil rights movement. We regret the omission."
+1 for creativity
BetterLaettner
by BetterLaettnerThanRider on Feb 15, 2010 3:10 PM CST up reply actions
As good as Tyrus is,
He’s one of my least favorite players in the entire NBA. And I don’t really know why we need him other than his defense.
makes sense
replace Hollins with Thomas in starting line up. Wolves apparently view Love as bench player (big mistake). So Start Al and Tyrus, bring Love off the bench.
Wolves need length and athleticism
Bulls get:
Gomes – can waive at end of year and not owe anything next year
Sessions
Cardinal
Pekovic
Wolves get:
Johnson
Thomas
Pargo
Jerome James
Their 1st this year
by AnotherDraftPickBitesTheDust on Feb 15, 2010 11:43 AM CST reply actions
they would still owe gomes money
which would count against the cap.
2010-2011: 1M
2011-2012: 1M
2012-2013: ~200K (or thereabouts)
by TheEvilProfessor on Feb 15, 2010 1:16 PM CST up reply actions
So the trade is...
Johnson, Thomas, Pargo, 1st for Gomes, Sessions Pekovic? Because James and Cardinal are both expirings. Would the Bulls really give up on Johnson and trade away their first for Sessions and Pekovic (if they’d really cut Gomes)? Just to get rid of Thomas? Who expires at the end of the year? I don’t think that has any chance of happening.
I think Rose would be amazing next to a guy that can pass the ball when he slashes, he could be more Dwyane Wade then Chris Paul, has to shore up his D though.
by AnotherDraftPickBitesTheDust on Feb 15, 2010 11:45 AM CST reply actions
Why?
Why would we want 3 of our best players PF’s, even if we do trade Al in the off season i don’t want to start Thomas and Love. Go after Iggy and Samy D! Then try to get Gay, starting lineup of PG Flynn SG Iggy SF Gay PF Love C Samy D plus we would have some rookies we get with our 1st round picks coming off the bench.
I'm calling shenanigans on that rumour
Plenty of supposed interest in Thomas and the Bulls want him gone. I don’t see us entering a big trade (and a bidding war) for the guy. Expirings and the Utah pick, sure. But the Charlotte pick is potentially more valuable: I’d like to see us use it.
Won't someone think of the ping pong balls?
Kurt Rambis - stop this insanity!
by Auswolf on Feb 15, 2010 1:40 PM CST via mobile reply actions
John Salmons
could be included somewhere. The Bulls want to get rid of him (maybe he would even renounce his player option here) for next years FA and he is a serviceable wing for us.
I’d like a blockbuster of:
To MN:
Heinrich/Deng
Noah
Thomas
Salmons
Johnson
Chi pick
To Chi:
Love
Cardinal
Blount
Wilkins
Jawai/Hollins (or other 1-2M expiring, but they might need a big besides Blount to replace Thomas and Noah)
MN pick
Pekovic
I have absolutely no idea how fair this is, but we both give up our untouchable pieces. We get our coveted defensive big, athletic big, Al Jefferson rotation and the Bulls get a pick swap, Love and Pekovic, and crap loads of cap space from Heinrich and Salmons (not to mention Noah and Johnson)
Chicago has a rotation of:
Rose
Crappy SG X
Deng/Wilkins
Love/Gibson
Miller/Hollins?
With Pekovic coming and our pick plus lots of space for Wade/Bosh
MN has:
Flynn/Sessions (he actually might have to be traded to help with Chi’s PG problem now since we have Heinrich as well)
Heinrich/Salmons/Ellington
Brewer/Salmons/Johnson
Jefferson/Thomas
Noah/Jefferson/Jawai
Chi’s pick which we could package with Charlottes to move up or get a couple around 10-15. The pick might be a deal breaker for me, but we really are cleaning up on this haul for Love, Pek, pickswap, and cap space. On second thought maybe I would prefer just to give them the Charlotte pick… I like ours…
Not gonna happen, but it’s interesting and it certainly fixes a lot of problems on both sides.
Research
Kahn said before the season that he was creating a database of all NBA players….I have a gut feeling that this ‘research’ on Thomas is a part of that.
you are correct
Forever splitting the Cheechakos from the Sourdoughs
www.canishoopus.com
by Stop-n-Pop on Feb 15, 2010 2:29 PM CST via mobile up reply actions
Floyd Landis School of Database Hacking Alumnus?
D’ope!
"Never make predictions, especially about the future." Casey Stengel
I like this if we got a draft pick to go with it:
http://games.espn.go.com/nba/tradeMachine
BetterLaettner
by BetterLaettnerThanRider on Feb 15, 2010 3:20 PM CST reply actions
I'd seriously consider this
if the Bulls throw in a 1st rounder and $3 mil to cover part of Hinrich’s salary next season. Then the Wolves can turn around and trade Hinrich to a contender at the deadline next season and get about four months out of him for nothing.
Also, I don’t know how strong the interest would be this summer in Thomas, but if the Wolves don’t really want him they could help a team over the cap get him this summer in a sign and trade and accumulate extra assets in the deal.
Here's another
http://games.espn.go.com/nba/tradeMachine?tradeId=ylnxnmb
and after this trade somehow acquire a shooting SG through trading the rights to Rubio, FA or the draft.
BetterLaettner
by BetterLaettnerThanRider on Feb 15, 2010 7:00 PM CST up reply actions
Wow, congrats on a trade that somehow makes both teams worse. I’m not that experienced with the trade machine, but that seems like quite a feat!
No thanks on the trade, btw.
When I get sad, I stop being sad and be awesome instead. True story.
btw
either way the Twolves have two starting PF’s and no starting SF or C and a barely passable starting SG.
BetterLaettner
by BetterLaettnerThanRider on Feb 15, 2010 8:46 PM CST up reply actions
Tyrus vs a 1st
CHI erred in refusing to extend Tyrus Thomas’ rookie scale deal last October, so he is an expiring.
A First Rounder allows a team to lock a player in for four years to rookie scale – the last two as team options. That’s far more valuable.
If we made the trade, at best we get a looksie, and his Bird rights. All that means is that we can match an offer, and if there is a bidding war, its doubtful we’d even do that. We could certainly lose a pick for no gain whatsoever. Far better to simply make an offer in free agency. It seems likely CHI won’t be matching.
Good point
Does he strike you as a guy who we be looking at in FA in any event?
I just think he is a bad fit.
Won't someone think of the ping pong balls?
Kurt Rambis - stop this insanity!
by Auswolf on Feb 15, 2010 5:32 PM CST via mobile up reply actions
Good fit functionally, bad fit positionally
The problem is he’s a pure PF. We could use either a combo forward that can play some SF along with PF OR we could use a PF that can play some C. He doesn’t really have a good shot or handles, so SF is out of the question. And he isn’t big enough to play C, so it really limits his usefulness to us with Love deserving 30+ minutes as our main PF.
by Rascal Flatts on Feb 15, 2010 6:17 PM CST up reply actions
I don’t like the idea of going after Thomas unless it’s essentially for free. Given that he’s a 4, he’d need to be resigned and he’s known as a somewhat of a head case, moving anything of value for him just doesn’t seem worth it to me.
When I get sad, I stop being sad and be awesome instead. True story.
Comments For This Post Are Closed
Secondary Sidebar
User Tools
Related FanPosts on Canis Hoopus
FanPosts
Community blog posts and discussion.
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.
